On February 2, 2023, the motion for reinstatement filed by attorney Vincent Dominick Paragano has been granted by the State of New York, Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Third Judicial Department.

In a 2013 order, the Supreme Court of New Jersey permanently disbarred the respondent for his involvement in a fraudulent real estate transaction. Moreover, the respondent had repeated misrepresentations to his former business partners and attempted to conceal his misconduct by submitting fictitious documents to disciplinary authorities.

In connection to the disbarment of the respondent in New Jersey, the New York Supreme Court disbarred the respondent as well for reciprocal discipline. Subsequently, a Motion for Reinstatement was filed. The matter was then forwarded to a Character and Fitness subcommittee for hearing and reporting.

On July 2022, after the hearing, the three-member subcommittee unanimously recommended that the respondent’s motion for reinstatement be denied. Upon the direction of the court, the parties have appeared before the same for argument. But in consideration of the arguments of the parties, the court stated that the respondent has satisfied establishing his entitlement to reinstatement.

The filing states:

“To that end, the respondent has testified credibly, both before the Character and Fitness subcommittee and this Court, that the events culminating in the loss of his law licenses represented the nadir of his professional and personal lives. During his personal statement before us at argument, the respondent accepted full and total responsibility for the conduct which gave rise to his disbarment and reflected on his “hundreds of hours” of subsequent introspection and contrition concerning his actions. Notably, the respondent’s disbarment coincided with a host of additional challenges which beset the respondent and his family, including the loss of his home to Hurricane Sandy and his adult child’s debilitating illness.”

The filing continues:

“The confluence of these multiple challenges ultimately led the respondent to embrace sobriety, eliminate unhealthy relationships and influences from his life, and seek therapeutic intervention.”

In sum, the respondent claims that he is a changed man. And this can be proven by the evidence that he has since reconciled with formerly estranged family members and reembraced an athletic discipline that has afforded him focus, friendships, and mentoring opportunities and has generally conducted himself in a lawful manner.

Despite the conclusion that the respondent has established the requisite character and fitness for the practice of law and that his reinstatement would be in the public’s interest, the court deemed it appropriate to condition the respondent’s reinstatement upon certain probationary requirements.

The filing further states:

“Accordingly, the respondent’s reinstatement is first conditioned upon his provision of proof to this Court and to the petitioner, within 60 days of this Court’s order, that the respondent has undergone an assessment or evaluation by LAP. Furthermore e, in the event that such assessment or evaluation results in the establishment of a monitoring agreement with a recommendation that the respondent participates in the Association’s Virtual Attorney Support Group, the respondent’s reinstatement is conditioned upon proof to this Court and to the petitioner of the respondent’s execution of such monitoring agreement or of respondent’s agreement to participate regularly in such Support Group. Furthermore, to the extent that the respondent’s counsel has indicated a willingness to provide ongoing risk management services to the respondent upon his return to practice, the respondent’s reinstatement is further conditioned upon proof to this Court and to the petitioner, within 60 days of this Court’s order, of an agreement between the respondent and his counsel to provide such risk management services to respondent until further order of this Court.”

With all these facts and evidence, the court granted the respondent’s petition for reinstatement.

The Disposition states:

“ORDERED that respondent’s motion for reinstatement is granted, and it is further ORDERED that respondent is reinstated as an attorney and counselor-at-law in the State of New York, effective March 3, 2023.”

Mr. Paragano attended American University, graduating in 1980. He is licensed in New Jersey, the District of Columbia, and New York with license no. 2133957. His info can be found on prabook.com.

A copy of the original filing can be found here.