
    In re WEILL.
    (Supreme Court, Appellate Division, First Department.
    November 5, 1915.)
    Attorney and Client @=>44—Misconduct—Disbarment.
    Where, through false representations, an attorney obtains money from clients, and refuses to return it, he should be disbarred.
    [Ed. -Note.—For other cases, see Attorney and Client, Cent. Dig. §§ 55, 56, 62; Dec. Dig. @=>14.]
    other cases see same topic & KEY-NUMBER in all Key-Numbered Digests <& Indexes
    
      In the matter of the application for the disbarment of Isaac Weill, an attorney, .for professional misconduct. On report of official referee. Respondent disbarred.
    See, also, 163 App. Div. 885, 147 N. Y. Supp. 1149.
    Argued before INGRAHAM, P. J., and CLARKE, SCOTT, and DOWLING, JJ.
    Einar Chrystie, of New York City (Abraham Tulin, of New York City, of counsel), for petitioner.
    George Edwin Joseph, of New York City, for respondent.
   PER CURIAM.

The respondent is charged by the Association of the Bar of the City of New York with unprofessional conduct in five different specifications. The case was practically undefended.

The petitioner offered competent evidence in support of each specification, and the respondent made no denial and called no witnesses. In fact, he practically abandoned any attempt at defense, although offered every opportunity by the official referee, to whom the matter was referred by this court. In each of the five instances specified in the petition the respondent stands convicted of having obtained money from clients upon false representations, and of having refused to return it.

He is evidently an unfit person to be an attorney at law, and is accordingly disbarred. Settle order on notice.  