Skip to content

Conduct of Registered Representatives and Attorneys Appearing before OATH’s Hearings Division.

Rule status: Proposed

Agency: OATH-ECB

Comment by date: May 18, 2022

Rule Full Text
OATH-Proposed-Rule-re-Registered-Representatives-Appearing-before-OATH-with-Certs-3.28.22.pdf

The Office of Administrative Trials and Hearings proposes to amend its rules governing the conduct of registered representatives and attorneys appearing before OATH’s Hearings Division.

Attendees who need reasonable accommodation for a disablity such as a sign language translation should contact the agency by calling 1 (212) 436-0708 or emailing enolan@oath.nyc.gov by May 17, 2022

Send comments by

Public Hearings

Date

May 18, 2022
11:00am - 1:00pm EDT

Location



Connect Virtually
https://nyc-oath.webex.com/nyc-oath/j.php?MTID=m4c5f2b212c257053067a4dd70783aecd
When prompted, enter Meeting ID: 2337 857 8841
Password: OATH

Phone. For access, dial: 1-646-992-2010
When prompted, enter Meeting ID: 2337 857 8841##

Disability Accommodation

Online comments: 2

  • Matthew Shapiro

    I am writing in regards to the proposed rule defining “misconduct” as:

    (16) Failing to appear at a hearing or abandoning representation without providing at least seven
    (7) days’ notice to the Respondent and the Tribunal; and

    Currently, OATH rules provide for vacating default judgment after failing to appear at a scheduled hearing. It does not make sense to both classify failing to appear as misconduct as well as providing specific rules to allow default judgments to be opened after failing to appear.

    Additionally, summonses are usually scheduled by OATH without the respondent (or attorney) being able too select a specific date. If a summons is rescheduled by an attorney and the attorney is then unavailable on that date, the attorney may have no choice but to “fail to appear” in order to file a request to reopen a default judgment after the hearing date has passed.

    Requiring an attorney to provide 7 days notice if they cannot appear on a scheduled date, and classifying this as attorney misconduct, is a significant hardship and an inflexible policy. This is especially the case since now remote hearings require attorneys to submit a list of cases to be heard at least three days prior to the hearing date.

    The proposed rule should eliminate this clause from the attorney misconduct definition.

    Comment added May 11, 2022 1:59pm
  • Andrew Mundo

    My concern is the same as voiced by Matthew Shapiro – the proposed rule defining “misconduct” as:

    (16) Failing to appear at a hearing or abandoning representation without providing at least seven
    (7) days’ notice to the Respondent and the Tribunal; and

    Currently, OATH rules provide for vacating default judgment after failing to appear at a scheduled hearing. It does not make sense to both classify failing to appear as misconduct as well as providing specific rules to allow default judgments to be opened after failing to appear.

    Additionally, summonses are usually scheduled by OATH without the respondent (or attorney) being able to select a specific date. If a summons is rescheduled by an attorney and the attorney is then unavailable on that date, the attorney may have no choice but to “fail to appear” in order to file a request to reopen a default judgment after the hearing date has passed.

    Requiring an attorney to provide 7 days notice if they cannot appear on a scheduled date, and classifying this as attorney misconduct, is a significant hardship and an inflexible policy. This is especially the case since now remote hearings require attorneys to submit a list of cases to be heard at least three days prior to the hearing date.

    The proposed rule should eliminate this clause from the attorney misconduct definition.

    Comment added May 12, 2022 11:59am

Comments are now closed.