In re Hogan
Opinion of the Court
Respondent was admitted to practice by this Court in 1987. He formerly maintained an office for the practice
Upon our review of, among other things, respondent’s motion for reinstatement and the materials submitted in opposition thereto, we find that respondent has failed to sufficiently demonstrate, by clear and convincing evidence, that he possesses the requisite character and fitness to resume the practice of law or that his reinstatement would be in the public interest (see Rules for Attorney Disciplinary Matters [22 NYCRR] § 1240.16 [a]). Accordingly, respondent’s motion is denied.
Ordered that respondent’s application for reinstatement is denied.
Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.