New York Law Journal
  • Home
  • News
  • Decisions
  • Columns
  • Practice Areas
  • My NYLJ
  • Careers
  • Courts
  • Verdicts
  • Public Notices
  • Smart Litigator

Home > Attorney Censured Over Questioning of Witnesses

Font Size: increase font decrease font

Attorney Censured Over Questioning of Witnesses

By Brendan Pierson Contact All Articles 

New York Law Journal

January 4, 2013

  •    
  •    
  •    
  •      
 

Related Items

  • Matter of Nativ Winiarsky, M-3232

The Appellate Division, First Department, on Dec. 27 censured Nativ Winiarsky, a partner at Kucker & Bruh, for questioning potential witnesses under oath in his office without notifying opposing counsel, rejecting his argument that the questioning was different from a formal deposition. The decision reversed a finding by a hearing panel of the Departmental Disciplinary Committee, which had accepted Winiarsky's argument.

The underlying case involved the roommate of a deceased tenant who claimed to be the tenant's domestic partner and sought succession rights. Winiarsky, who represented the landlord, issued subpoenas to the tenant's adult children and filed a motion in court seeking discovery. The children asked to come to Winiarsky's office to avoid mandatory court appearances. Winiarsky withdrew his motion for discovery, but did not tell opposing counsel he was examining the witnesses under oath in his office. The roommate's lawyer eventually learned of the questioning and moved for sanctions. The court suppressed the testimony and awarded attorney fees.

The disciplinary committee filed charges alleging that Winiarsky had violated CPLR 408 by essentially deposing witnesses without telling opposing counsel. A referee upheld the charges, but a hearing panel reversed, ruling that Winiarsky's questioning in his office was not the same as a formal deposition. The First Department reversed, finding that the hearing panel's reasoning was flawed and the questioning "had all the indicia of a deposition." It rejected Winiarsky's argument that the witnesses were free to leave at any time, saying the witnesses, as unrepresented lay people, probably did not know that.

Both the hearing panel and the First Department agreed that Winiarsky should be censured for a separate, unrelated charge arising from an ex parte email about a job opening at his firm that he sent to a court attorney acting as a special referee in a case Winiarsky was working on. The First Department panel consisted of Justices Peter Tom (See Profile), Angela Mazzarelli (See Profile), David Saxe (See Profile), James Catterson (See Profile) and Leland DeGrasse (See Profile) in Matter of Winiarsky, M-3232 and M-4033.



Subscribe to New York Law Journal

You must be signed in to comment on an article

Find similar content

Companies, agencies mentioned

    
  • Departmental Disciplinary Committee
  • Kucker & Bruh
  • Appellate Division

Key categories

    
  • Ethics

Most viewed stories

    
  1. Departure of President Leaves Dean in Charge at Brooklyn Law
    •      
  2. NYLJ 100
    •      
  3. Lawyers' Pro Bono Hours, Contributions, Will Be Public
    •      
  4. NYLJ 100: Regional Firm Growth Outpaces Larger Firms in 2012
    •      
  5. City and Clinic Spar Over Bill for Law Student Representation
    •      
lawjobs.com

TOP JOBS

MORE JOBS

POST A JOB

From the Law.com Network

In-House Counsel Go to Privacy Boot Camp

In-House Changes at News Corp Ahead of Corporate Split

Proskauer, Former CFO Settle Bias Suit

Global Firms Cope With Istanbul Unrest

D.C. Circuit Nominations a Defining Moment

D.C. Circuit Nominees Widely Respected Within the Bar

Nine Tips to Avoid Starring in a Spreadsheet Horror Story

Snapshot: Tom Gelbmann

The Recorder 25: California Golden Again for Many Firms
  •      
    • Subscription Required

Capital Accounts: Judicial Branch's Brothers Don't See Eye to Eye
  •      
    • Subscription Required

Miami Photographer Sues Pop Star Justin Bieber
  •      
    • Subscription Required

Jeremy Alters Settles With Argentinian Firm For $1 Million
  •      
    • Subscription Required

Alcotest Should Be Discontinued Right Away, DWI Lawyers Say

Lawyer's Fudging of Forms Draws N.J. High Court Censure
  •      
    • Subscription Required

The Affordable State-Specific Practice Solution
Available in NY, NJ, PA and CT editions - research, draft and prepare even the most complex cases with ease.

Ties to Senecas Cannot Shield Golf Course Developer, Panel Says
  •      
    • Subscription Required

Circuit Decision Costs Prevailing Attorneys $200,000 Fee Award
  •      
    • Subscription Required

Corbett Signs Bill to Eliminate Traffic Court

Christian College Granted Injunction In Obamacare Suit
  •      
    • Subscription Required

Sorry, Charlie, Your Wife Won't Support You

Top Reasons to Take Your Husband's Name

Interim Dean Named at Texas Wesleyan University School of Law
  •      
    • Subscription Required

Water Works: H2O Kept Lawyer-Lobbyists Busy
  •      
    • Subscription Required

Boosting Lawyers And Saving Lives
  •      
    • Subscription Required

11th Circuit Conflicted On Juveniles Stance
  •      
    • Subscription Required

Chimp Attack Victim Is Denied $150M State Lawsuit

Auto Body Case May Lead To CUTPA Reassessment

  • About NYLJ   |
  • Contact NYLJ   |
  • Advertise with Us   |
  • Sitemap
  • About |
  • ALM Properties |
  • ALM Reprints |
  • Customer Support |
  • Privacy Policy (updated 6/14/13) |
  • Terms & Conditions |
  • ALM User License Agreement
ALM Media