PER CURIAM — On February 3, 2020, the Grievance Committee for the Tenth Judicial District served the respondent, by means of substituted service, as authorized by the Presiding Justice pursuant to Judiciary Law §90(6), with a notice of petition and a verified petition, both dated October 25, 2019, and duly filed those papers with this Court together with an affidavit of service. The petition contains three charges alleging, among other things, that the respondent failed to re-register with the Office of Court Administration (hereinafter OCA) as required by Judiciary Law 468-a; failed to update the OCA of his current business address as required by Judiciary Law 468-a; and failed to cooperate with the Grievance Committee in the investigation of a complaint of professional misconduct. The notice of petition directed the respondent to serve and file his answer to the verified petition within 20 days after service of the notice of petition and the verified petition. To date, the respondent has neither served nor filed an answer to the verified petition, as directed. The Grievance Committee now moves to deem the charges against the respondent established based upon his default and to impose such discipline upon him as this Court deems appropriate. The motion papers were served, by means of substituted service, as authorized by the Presiding Justice pursuant to Judiciary Law §90(6), upon the respondent on March 6, 2020. To date, the respondent has failed to submit papers in response to the motion. Accordingly, the Grievance Committee’s motion to deem the charges of the verified petition dated October 25, 2019, established is granted, the charges in the verified petition are deemed established, and, effective immediately, the respondent is disbarred, and his name is stricken from the roll of attorneys and counselors-at-law. All concur. ORDERED that the Grievance Committee’s motion to deem the charges in the verified petition dated October 25, 2019, established is granted; and it is further, ORDERED that pursuant to Judiciary Law §90, effective immediately, the respondent, Nicholas Christopher Connolly, is disbarred, and his name is stricken from the roll of attorneys and counselors-at-law; and it is further, ORDERED that the respondent, Nicholas Christopher Connolly, shall comply with the rules governing the conduct of disbarred or suspended attorneys (see 22 NYCRR 1240.15); and it is further, ORDERED that pursuant to Judiciary Law §90, the respondent, Nicholas Christopher Connolly, is commanded to desist and refrain from (1) 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; and it is further, ORDERED that if the respondent, Nicholas Christopher Connolly, has been issued a secure pass by the Office of Court Administration, it shall be returned forthwith to the issuing agency, and the respondent shall certify to the same in his affidavit of compliance pursuant to 22 NYCRR 1240.15(f). ENTER: Aprilanne Agostino Clerk of the Court
