In a significant ruling on October 27, 2026, the Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York suspended attorney David Spiegelman from practicing law. This decision follows a series of serious allegations against him, including misappropriation of client funds that resulted in a $20 million judgment against him. The ruling affects Spiegelman, his clients, and the legal community, highlighting the importance of ethical conduct in the legal profession.

The case, officially titled Matter of Spiegelman (Motion No. 2026-03712 | Case No. 2026-01398), was initiated by the Attorney Grievance Committee (AGC) for the First Judicial Department. The AGC sought to find Spiegelman guilty of professional misconduct based on previous civil judgments against him, which detailed a pattern of fraudulent behavior. The court's decision underscores the serious consequences attorneys face when they violate ethical standards.

Background

David Spiegelman, admitted to practice law in New York since 2000, was involved in a contentious legal dispute with former clients Pete Jacov and Avraham Glattman. The clients accused Spiegelman of engaging in a fraudulent scheme that misappropriated $4.5 million they invested with him and his co-defendant, James Williams. The plaintiffs alleged that Spiegelman and Williams induced them to invest in fictitious real estate developments, using forged documents and false representations to cover their tracks.

Jacov and Glattman filed their complaints in 2014 and 2015, citing numerous causes of action, including fraud, breach of fiduciary duty, and legal malpractice. They claimed that Spiegelman had taken out unauthorized loans in their names and misappropriated funds from their escrow accounts. The case evolved over several years, with Spiegelman repeatedly defaulting on court orders and motions, which ultimately led to a default judgment against him in 2020.

The Ruling

The court ruled that Spiegelman's conduct constituted serious violations of the New York Rules of Professional Conduct. Specifically, the AGC's motion highlighted Spiegelman's misappropriation of client funds, illegal conduct reflecting on his fitness as a lawyer, and acts of dishonesty and fraud. The court stated, "Respondent's deliberate diversion and misuse of his clients' escrow funds... constitutes intentional conversion and misappropriation of client funds in violation of rules 8.4(c) and 1.15(a)."

In its decision, the court emphasized that Spiegelman had a full and fair opportunity to litigate the issues against him, despite his claims to the contrary. The ruling noted that his failure to respond to the civil complaints and subsequent motions was a deliberate choice, not a result of circumstances beyond his control. As a result, the court granted the AGC's request for an interim suspension, effective immediately.

Impact

This ruling serves as a stark reminder of the consequences attorneys face for unethical behavior. Spiegelman's suspension not only affects his ability to practice law but also serves as a warning to other legal professionals about the importance of maintaining ethical standards. The ruling reinforces the principle that attorneys must act in the best interests of their clients and uphold the integrity of the legal profession.

The decision may also set a precedent for future cases involving attorney misconduct, particularly those involving financial misappropriation. The court's application of collateral estoppel in this case demonstrates how previous judgments can impact disciplinary proceedings against attorneys, emphasizing the importance of accountability within the legal system.

What's Next

Spiegelman can appeal the court's decision, but details regarding any pending appeals or related cases were not available in the court filing. The AGC's request for a hearing to consider evidence in mitigation or aggravation will also proceed, determining the final sanctions against Spiegelman.