Here’s a roundup of recent disciplinary cases from the New York Appellate Divisions. These involve lawyers who were either disbarred or suspended for serious ethical breaches including fraud, misuse of client funds, and misconduct involving vulnerable clients. The decisions show just how seriously the courts take violations of legal ethics and professional responsibility.
Appellate Division: First Department, Matter of Rudy Giuliani, 210 A.D.3d 1st Department 2024
Disbarred for making knowingly false statements about election results, undermining public confidence in the legal profession.
Giuliani’s New York law license was suspended on June 24, 2021, based on findings that he made “demonstrably false and misleading statements to courts, lawmakers and the public” in connection with efforts to overturn the 2020 presidential election. The court found his conduct posed an “immediate threat” to the public and warranted interim suspension .
Around the same time, his law license in Washington, D.C. was also suspended, and a disciplinary board later recommended disbarment there as well.
A unanimous appellate panel of the First Department found that Giuliani “flagrantly misused” his position as Trump’s personal attorney by repeatedly and intentionally making false statements, some of which amounted to perjury, to federal courts, state legislators, the Attorney Grievance Committee, the public, and this Court regarding the 2020 election
The court wrote that his actions “baselessly attacked and undermined the integrity of this country’s electoral process” and that he “actively contributed to the national strife” following the election, remaining “entirely unrepentant
The court ordered Giuliani to desist from practicing law in any form meaning he must not hold himself out as an attorney or provide legal opinion or advice in New York even informally.
Giuliani’s disbarment is exceptionally rare not only for its scale over nationally significant falsehoods but also for demonstrating that intentional political deception can breach core ethical duties and justify the profession’s most severe sanction.
The ruling underscores that the legal profession imposes obligations beyond speech: attorneys must refrain from knowingly propagating false claims, especially when such conduct is linked to public disorder or undermining democratic norms.
Appellate Division: Third Department, Matter of Lushchinsky, 208 A.D.3d 3d Department 2022.
Sanctioned for menacing criminal conduct, disruptive courtroom behavior, and refusal to cooperate or show remorse. Court barred practice pending further order.
Suspension followed that the respondent sprayed a chemical irritant at subway passengers, Physically assaulted another with an umbrella and her leg caught on camera. At a virtual pre‑hearing, Lushchinsky was described as “totally indifferent and disrespectful”: she interrupted counsel, said “Nobody cares,” denied her conviction, and refused to participate in a hearing. She failed to report her criminal conviction to the grievance committee and the court as required by law.
The court confirmed the Referee’s report and granted the Committee’s motion for discipline.
Citing her criminal conduct, lack of cooperation, courtroom misconduct, and failure to report, the Appellate Division considered her unfit for reinstatement under ethical rules.
Imposed discipline: a three-year suspension, with a strict prohibition from practicing law in any form until further order, and reinstatement conditional upon compliance with ethics rules.
A Judge’s Due Process Failure: What the Susan L. Greenberg Case Means for Justice
In a rare but important display of accountability, the California Commission on Judicial Performance issued a public admonishment against Judge