Matter of Attorneys in Violation of Judiciary Law § 468-a (Eagan)
Opinion
It appears you are using Adblock. Please disable Adblock to best experience our website.
Bureau Thomas J.K. Smith, State Reporter
Matter of Attorneys in Violation of Judiciary Law § 468-a (Eagan)
2026 NY Slip Op 03048
May 14, 2026
Appellate Division, Third Department
Published by New York State Law Reporting Bureau pursuant to Judiciary Law § 431.
This decision is uncorrected and subject to revision before publication in the Official Reports.
In the Matter of Attorneys in Violation of Judiciary Law § 468-a. Committee on Professional Standards, Now Known as Attorney Grievance Committee for the Third Judicial Department, Petitioner; Travis Robert Eagan, Respondent. (Attorney Registration No. 4336756.)
Decided and Entered:May 14, 2026
PM-103-26
Calendar Date: April 20, 2026
Before: Garry, P.J., Clark, Pritzker, Reynolds Fitzgerald And Ryba, JJ., Concur.
Monica A. Duffy, Attorney Grievance Committee for the Third Judicial Department, Albany (Alison M. Coan of counsel), for Attorney Grievance Committee for the Third Judicial Department.
Travis Robert Eagan, Costa Mesa, California, respondent pro se.
Motion by respondent for an order reinstating him to the practice of law following his suspension by January 2014 order of this Court (Matter of Attorneys in Violation of Judiciary Law § 468-a, 113 AD3d 1020, 1030 [3d Dept 2014]; see Rules for Atty Disciplinary Matters [22 NYCRR] § 1240.16; Rules of App Div, 3d Dept [22 NYCRR] § 806.16).
Upon reading respondent's notice of motion and affidavit with exhibits sworn to March 12, 2026 and the April 13, 2026 responsive correspondence from the Attorney Grievance Committee for the Third Judicial Department, and having determined that respondent has not demonstrated, by clear and convincing evidence, his compliance with the rules of this Court (see Rules for Atty Disciplinary Matters [22 NYCRR] § 1240.16 [a]; Rules of App Div, 3d Dept [22 NYCRR] § 806.16 [c] [5]), it is
ORDERED that respondent's motion for reinstatement is denied.
Garry, P.J., Clark, Pritzker, Reynolds Fitzgerald and Ryba, JJ., concur.
Links to or from other sites do not signify endorsement or relationship with them.
Opinion
It appears you are using Adblock. Please disable Adblock to best experience our website.
Bureau Thomas J.K. Smith, State Reporter
Matter of Attorneys in Violation of Judiciary Law § 468-a (Eagan)
2026 NY Slip Op 03048
May 14, 2026
Appellate Division, Third Department
Published by New York State Law Reporting Bureau pursuant to Judiciary Law § 431.
This decision is uncorrected and subject to revision before publication in the Official Reports.
In the Matter of Attorneys in Violation of Judiciary Law § 468-a. Committee on Professional Standards, Now Known as Attorney Grievance Committee for the Third Judicial Department, Petitioner; Travis Robert Eagan, Respondent. (Attorney Registration No. 4336756.)
Decided and Entered:May 14, 2026
PM-103-26
Calendar Date: April 20, 2026
Before: Garry, P.J., Clark, Pritzker, Reynolds Fitzgerald And Ryba, JJ., Concur.
Monica A. Duffy, Attorney Grievance Committee for the Third Judicial Department, Albany (Alison M. Coan of counsel), for Attorney Grievance Committee for the Third Judicial Department.
Travis Robert Eagan, Costa Mesa, California, respondent pro se.
Motion by respondent for an order reinstating him to the practice of law following his suspension by January 2014 order of this Court (Matter of Attorneys in Violation of Judiciary Law § 468-a, 113 AD3d 1020, 1030 [3d Dept 2014]; see Rules for Atty Disciplinary Matters [22 NYCRR] § 1240.16; Rules of App Div, 3d Dept [22 NYCRR] § 806.16).
Upon reading respondent's notice of motion and affidavit with exhibits sworn to March 12, 2026 and the April 13, 2026 responsive correspondence from the Attorney Grievance Committee for the Third Judicial Department, and having determined that respondent has not demonstrated, by clear and convincing evidence, his compliance with the rules of this Court (see Rules for Atty Disciplinary Matters [22 NYCRR] § 1240.16 [a]; Rules of App Div, 3d Dept [22 NYCRR] § 806.16 [c] [5]), it is
ORDERED that respondent's motion for reinstatement is denied.
Garry, P.J., Clark, Pritzker, Reynolds Fitzgerald and Ryba, JJ., concur.
Links to or from other sites do not signify endorsement or relationship with them.
Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.