Larchmont lawyer Joseph C. Messina disbarred

Larchmont lawyer Joseph C. Messina has been disbarred for misappropriating client funds and other professional misconduct.

Messina submitted a resignation to the Second Appellate Division in November, acknowledging that he was under investigation by the local judicial grievance committee and affirming that he could not successfully defend himself against one or more charges.

The appellate court accepted his resignation on Feb. 15 and immediately disbarred him.

Messina, a graduate of Fordham University School of Law, has practiced in New York since 1977 and operated his firm in Mamaroneck. He specialized in real estate and land use, intellectual property, commercial contracts, entertainment law and civil rights litigation, according to his LinkedIn profile.

He was facing three complaints of professional misconduct, according to the appellate court order, for allegedly misappropriating funds, commingling law practice funds with personal funds, conflict of interest, failure to maintain separate accounts as an executor, failure to properly identify his escrow account, and failure to maintain bookkeeping records for his escrow account.

The appellate court did not identify specific cases or victims.

According to Westchester Supreme Court records, several clients have sued Messina from 2012 to 2022 for alleged financial irregularities.

For example, Donato Guzzetta of Mamaroneck has claimed in four separate but similar complaints filed from 2020 to 2022 that he loaned more than $1.1 million to Messina “to assist in both his personal life and business practice.”

They had been friends for more than 60 years, since the third grade, according to the complaints, and Messina had represented Guzzetta on several matters in the previous 30 years.

But when Guzzetta tried to collect on the debts, Messina allegedly defaulted on the promissory notes.

Messina’s attorney has filed motions to dismiss the cases.

In the disbarment action, the appellate court found that Messina had not properly addressed the issue of restitution. The court directed the grievance committee to pursue the issue and ordered Messina to cooperate with the committee.