On Wednesday, April 12, 2023, the Supreme Court of the State of New York Appellate Division disbarred attorney Patrick Michael Megaro. The case is entitled “In the Matter of Patrick Michael Megaro,” with case no. 2021-04541.
On April 27, 2021, the respondent was disciplined by the Disciplinary Hearing Commission (DHC) and the North Carolina State Bar. In the North Carolina proceeding, an amended complaint was filed against the respondent containing 19 charges of misconduct stemming from his representation of two diminished capacity criminal defendants who were exonerated, and one charge concerning his failure to act with reasonable diligence and promptness in an unrelated appellate matter.
The filing states:
“A five-day hearing took place from March 15 to 19, 2021, before the DHC wherein the respondent was represented by counsel, F . Lane Williamson. On April 27, 2021, the DHC issued a 24-page order of discipline, finding that, based on “the record proper, the stipulations of the parties, the testimony and exhibits admitted at the hearing, and upon making credibility determinations of the witnesses who testified at the hearing, the NCSB established by “clear, cogent, and convincing evidence” that the respondent violated 11 charges and dismissing the rest.”
In the DHC matter, the respondent admitted to technical trust account violations and inaccurate language in his retainer agreements. Moreover, it was alleged that the respondent committed several misconducts through improper fees, entering into a representation agreement with his clients when he knew they did not have the capacity to understand the agreement, making false statements to a tribunal, engaging in conduct involving dishonesty, fraud, deceit or misrepresentation that was prejudicial to the administration of justice, making material misrepresentation, misusing entrusted funds, failing to withdraw the amounts to which the defendant is entitled to, and engaging in a conflict of interest.
The filing continues:
“Nevertheless, the DHC concluded that the respondent s misconduct caused significant harm to the profession because it reinforced the negative stereotype that attorneys are “greedy, selfish, and dishonest.” While the respondent cooperated during the disciplinary proceeding, the DHC found that the respondent had a “pervasive tendency to blame others for his misconduct rather than acknowledging wrongdoing.” Specifically, the respondent blamed McCollum’s and Brown’s previous attorneys for the allegations of misconduct rather than his own misconduct. The DHC found that the respondent “ha[d] not expressed remorse or shown any insight regarding the ways in which he betrayed his client’s trust.”
Under the totality of the circumstances, including the character of evidence submitted, the court found that disbarment is the appropriate sanction.
The order states:
“ORDERED that pursuant to 22 NYCRR 1240.13, the respondent, Patrick Michael Megaro, is disbarred, effective immediately, and his name is stricken from the roll of attorneys and counselors-at-law; and it is further, ORDERED that the respondent, Patrick Michael Megaro, shall comply with the rules governing the conduct of disbarred or suspended attorneys (see id. 1240.15); and it is further, ORDERED that pursuant to Judiciary Law 90, effective immediately, the respondent, Patrick Michael Megaro, shall desist and refrain from (l) practicing law in any form, either as principal or as agent, clerk, or employee of another, (2) appearing as an attorney or counselor-at-law before any court, Judge, Justice, board, commission, or other public authority, (3) giving to another an opinion as to the law or its application or any advice in relation thereto, and (4) holding himself out in any way as an attorney and counselor-at-law.”
Mr. Megaro attended Hofstra Law School. He is licensed in North Carolina as well as in New York with license no. 4094983. His info can be found on appealslawgroup.com.
A copy of the original filing can be found here.
