In a significant ruling on May 28, 2026, the Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York reinstated attorney Daniel E. Budorick to the practice of law. Budorick, who had been suspended since January 2014, successfully demonstrated that he met all necessary requirements for reinstatement. This decision affects Budorick's ability to practice law and highlights the court's process for reviewing attorney conduct.

The reinstatement comes after Budorick filed a motion seeking to return to the legal profession. The court's decision is important not only for Budorick but also for the legal community, as it emphasizes the standards and processes involved in attorney discipline and reinstatement.

Background

Daniel E. Budorick, the respondent in this case, had faced suspension from the practice of law due to violations of Judiciary Law § 468-a. His suspension was enacted by a court order in January 2014, which found that he had not complied with the necessary legal standards. The case was brought before the Appellate Division's Attorney Grievance Committee, which oversees attorney conduct in the Third Judicial Department.

After several years of suspension, Budorick sought to be reinstated. He filed a notice of motion and provided affidavits and exhibits to support his request. The court reviewed these documents and assessed whether Budorick had fulfilled the conditions required for reinstatement, including compliance with the prior suspension order and demonstrating good character and fitness to practice law.

The Ruling

The court ruled in favor of Budorick's motion for reinstatement, stating that he had satisfied the requirements set forth in the Rules of the Appellate Division, Third Department. The judges involved in the decision included Reynolds Fitzgerald, Ceresia, Powers, Corcoran, and Ryba, all of whom concurred with the ruling.

The court noted, "respondent has satisfied the requirements of Rules of the Appellate Division, Third Department (22 NYCRR) § 806.16 (c) (5)," and further emphasized that it would be in the public interest to reinstate him.

Additionally, the court found that Budorick had complied with the order of suspension and demonstrated the requisite character and fitness to practice law. This ruling allows Budorick to return to his legal career immediately.

Impact

This decision is significant for Budorick as it restores his ability to practice law after a lengthy suspension. It also serves as a reminder of the importance of compliance with legal and ethical standards in the legal profession. The ruling may influence other attorneys who have faced similar disciplinary actions, as it outlines the criteria for reinstatement and the court's willingness to grant second chances when appropriate.

Moreover, this case reinforces the role of the Attorney Grievance Committee in monitoring attorney conduct and ensuring that those who wish to return to practice meet the necessary standards. The court's decision may set a precedent for future cases involving attorney reinstatement, particularly in how character and compliance are evaluated.

What's Next

Budorick's reinstatement is effective immediately, allowing him to resume his legal practice. There are no indications in the court filing regarding any pending appeals or related cases at this time. Details were not available in the court filing.