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. Legal Services NYC Employees Strike; Lower Intake Expected
    •      
  2. Stop-and-Frisk Judge Relishes Her Independence
    •      
  3. Trial Founders on 'Personality Issues' Between Judge, Counsel
    •      
  4. Court Officials Seek to Reform Process of Naming Acting Justices
    •      
  5. Donovan Criticizes Secret Payoff to Lopez Victims
    •      
lawjobs.com

TOP JOBS

MORE JOBS

POST A JOB

From the Law.com Network

The General Counsel and the Compensation Committee

Your Company's Been Hacked -- What Comes Next?

Simpson Helps Yahoo, Tumblr Connect for $1 Billion Deal

Kasowitz Benson Launches in Los Angeles

Contrite Companies Can Win Forgiveness in Bribery Cases
  •      
    • Subscription Required

Plaintiffs Want to See Toyota's 'Crown Jewels'
  •      
    • Subscription Required

Collaboration Is Key to Defending Cyberattacks

Stanford Law Builds on Role as Legal Tech Incubator

Prolific ADA Plaintiff Faces Nemesis in Harassment Suit

Ullyot Exit Closes Chapter for Facebook

South Florida Attorneys Lead Force-Placed Insurance Fight

Suit Names Missing Attorney Timothy McCabe For Alleged Fraud
  •      
    • Subscription Required

Circuit Voids $3 Million Judgment Against 'Girls Gone Wild' Producer

Judge Says Boston Bombings Had No Affect on Terrorist Sentences
  •      
    • 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.

Judge Declines to Block Act-of-War Defense in 9/11 Case
  •      
    • Subscription Required

Panel Finds 'Excessive' City Fine for Poaching Antenna From Trash
  •      
    • Subscription Required

Lawsuit Testing Federal Porn Regulation Allowed to Survive

Ex-College QB Can Press Claim Over EA's Video Game
  •      
    • Subscription Required

Law Schools Are Looking Beyond LSATs, Says Mich. Dean

Is Freezing Your Eggs the Solution?

Water Warriors: Local Governments Bring Pollution Suits
  •      
    • Subscription Required

Sanction Reversed; Filing of Sexually Explicit Chat OKd
  •      
    • Subscription Required

Brooks Looks To Political Ally For Criminal Defense

Attorney Fee Hearing in Waffle House Sex Case Heats Up
  •      
    • Subscription Required

Corporate Bribery Case Part Of National Trend
  •      
    • Subscription Required

Court Continues To Grant Lawyers Fraud Immunity
  •      
    • Subscription Required

  • Books
  • Advertise
  • Contact NYLJ
  • About NYLJ
  • RSS
  • Subscribe
  • About |
  • ALM Properties |
  • ALM Reprints |
  • Customer Support |
  • Privacy Policy |
  • Terms & Conditions |
  • ALM User License Agreement
ALM Media