Media Coverage
Source: New York State Bar Association Journal
Media Coverage
Press Contacts: Erik Cummins, Matt Hyams, Taina Rosa, Olivia Thomas
06.30.25
In an article written for the New York State Bar Association Journal, Pillsbury partner Rolando Acosta and associates Dante Apuzzo and Catherine Perez discuss New York Judiciary Law Section 90(10), which mandates that all disciplinary proceedings be closed to the public unless and until public discipline is imposed.
This longstanding policy of confidentiality for disciplinary proceedings and documents, they note, limits the reputational harm to attorneys subjected to unfounded complaints, promotes trust in the legal profession, encourages the participation of witnesses, and prevents the disclosure of privileged and sensitive personal information.
Recently, however, the wisdom underlying Judiciary Law Section 90(10) has been under attack, the authors say. Detractors have argued that the level of confidentiality in New York disciplinary proceedings is inconsistent with the First Amendment and with the national practice of affording public access to all disciplinary documents and proceedings.
Would converting today’s closed system into an open file serve clients, courts, and the broader public? The short answer to both questions, the authors argue, is no.
While they agree that New York’s lawyers must be held accountable for improper or unethical conduct, not every disciplinary complaint has merit, which is why they believe keeping files closed until probable cause is shown is the sounder course.
Click here to read the full story.