On Thursday, August 7, 2025, the Supreme Court of the State of New York, Appellate Division, Third Judicial Department censured attorney Suzann Leigh Beckett for professional misconduct committed in Connecticut.
The case is entitled “In the Matter of Suzann Leigh Beckett,” with case number PM-174-25.
The decision followed a motion by the Attorney Grievance Committee for the Third Judicial Department, which sought discipline based on two prior reprimands issued against Beckett in Connecticut.
Beckett has been suspended in New York since January 2014 due to her failure to comply with biennial registration requirements. Although she resolved this delinquency in April 2025 and applied for reinstatement, she remains suspended pending the court’s decision on her reinstatement motion.
The Connecticut reprimands stem from separate incidents of misconduct. In December 2001, following a hearing, the Connecticut Statewide Grievance Committee reprimanded Beckett for multiple violations, including making a false statement of material fact to a tribunal. In September 2021, Beckett consented to a second reprimand after admitting to charging an unreasonable fee and failing to provide written communication regarding the scope of representation or the rate of fees and expenses to a client.
The Attorney Grievance Committee argued that Beckett’s failure to notify the court or the committee of her Connecticut reprimands, as required by New York disciplinary rules, was an aggravating factor.
In her defense, Beckett stated that her failure to report was unintentional, resulting from a mistaken belief that she had resigned from the New York bar. She also expressed remorse, highlighted her cooperation with both Connecticut authorities and the New York committee, and noted the significant time that had passed since the reprimands.
The court found that Beckett’s misconduct in Connecticut violated New York’s Rules of Professional Conduct, including rules on client communication, reasonable fees, and truthful statements to tribunals.
While New York is not required to impose the same sanctions as Connecticut, the court considered the need to protect the public, uphold the legal profession’s integrity, and deter similar misconduct. Taking into account Beckett’s cooperation and efforts to address her New York registration delinquency, the court imposed a censure rather than a harsher penalty.
According to Avvo, Ms. Beckett is an estate planning lawyer in Greenwich, CT. She acquired her law license in New York in 1988.
A copy of the original filing can be found here.
