A New York court has accepted the resignation of attorney Zack Allen Clement, who sought to leave the New York bar for nondisciplinary reasons. The Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York made this decision on September 3, 2026. This ruling affects Clement's ability to practice law in New York, as he is now officially removed from the roll of attorneys.
The case, identified as Matter of Clement (Docket PM-190-26), highlights the process through which attorneys can resign from the bar without facing disciplinary actions. Clement's resignation is significant as it underscores the legal framework that allows attorneys to leave their profession under specific conditions.
Zack Allen Clement was admitted to practice law in New York in 2007. He has since listed his business address in Houston, Texas. The Attorney Grievance Committee for the Third Judicial Department, which oversees attorney conduct in New York, reviewed Clement's application and did not oppose his request to resign. This lack of opposition indicates that there were no ongoing disciplinary issues or complaints against him at the time of his resignation.
The process began when Clement submitted an affidavit on July 28, 2026, which was filed with the court on August 6, 2026. In his affidavit, he expressed his desire to resign from the New York bar. Following this, the Deputy Chief Attorney for the Attorney Grievance Committee provided a response on August 26, 2026, confirming that they found Clement eligible to resign for nondisciplinary reasons.
The court ruled in favor of Clement's application, stating, "We grant his application and accept his resignation." The judges involved in this decision included Pritzker, J.P., Ceresia, Powers, Corcoran, and Ryba. Their unanimous agreement reflects the court's support for Clement's decision to step away from his legal practice.
As a result of this ruling, Zack Allen Clement's name has been officially stricken from the roll of attorneys and counselors-at-law in New York. This action is effective immediately, meaning Clement can no longer practice law in the state. The court also ordered him to refrain from any legal practice in New York, whether as a principal or in any other capacity, including as an employee or agent of another.
The court further commanded Clement to surrender any Attorney Secure Pass issued to him within 30 days of the decision. This requirement ensures that he no longer has access to legal resources or privileges associated with being an attorney in New York.
This ruling has implications for other attorneys considering resigning from the bar. It establishes a clear process for resigning without facing disciplinary actions, which may encourage others in similar situations to pursue resignation if they feel it is necessary. The decision also reinforces the importance of maintaining ethical standards within the legal profession.
Going forward, this ruling serves as a precedent for future cases involving attorney resignations. It clarifies the conditions under which attorneys can resign without facing disciplinary consequences. This may influence how other attorneys approach their own resignations and the steps they must take to ensure compliance with New York's legal standards.
Details were not available in the court filing regarding whether Clement has any pending cases or if he plans to continue practicing law in another jurisdiction. However, his resignation from the New York bar indicates a significant shift in his legal career.
As of now, there is no indication that Clement's resignation will be appealed. The court's decision appears to be final, and there are no related cases pending that would affect this ruling.