This is Part 1 of a five-part investigative series on Cheryl Cozza Milano, an Armonk, New York resident who was suspended from practicing law in New York State in 1997 and remains under an active, indefinite suspension as of June 2026 — nearly three decades after the Appellate Division of the New York Supreme Court ordered her off the rolls.
Who Is Cheryl Cozza Milano — and Why Does She Go By "Cheryl Cozza"?
Cheryl Cozza Milano — who also goes by Cheryl Cozza, dropping the married name "Milano" — is a resident of Armonk, New York, located in Westchester County. The name variation is worth noting at the outset: this reporting has observed that she presents herself under different name combinations in different contexts. Whether intentional or incidental, using "Cheryl Cozza" without "Milano" makes it significantly harder for people to find her full public record through a Google search. The Ethics Reporter is publishing under both names to ensure that anyone who encounters her under either name has access to the documented facts.
For clarity: Cheryl Cozza and Cheryl Cozza Milano are the same person. Her full legal name as it appears on the New York State bar record is Cheryl Ann Cozza. Her married name is Milano. She is one individual with one bar record and one documented history. She attended Pace University School of Law and was admitted to the New York State Bar on July 25, 1990, registered under New York State Unified Court System Registration Number 2353167, assigned to the 2nd Appellate Division Department.
On paper, she is an attorney. In practice — under the law — she has not been permitted to practice law in the State of New York for nearly 28 years.
That distinction matters enormously. And as The Ethics Reporter has documented, it is a distinction that Cheryl Cozza Milano has not always been forthcoming about when dealing with small business owners and private individuals.
The Bar Record Speaks for Itself
The New York State Unified Court System's Attorney Online Services database is a public record — accessible to anyone with an internet connection. A search for Cheryl Ann Cozza (Registration Number 2353167) returns the following documented disciplinary history:
First Suspension: Effective July 15, 1997 through March 29, 1998
Ordered by the Appellate Division, 2nd Department
Second Suspension: Effective March 30, 1998 — present
Ordered by the Appellate Division, 2nd Department
Current Registration Status: Suspended, delinquent
The second suspension carries no listed end date. It has been running continuously since March 30, 1998. As of the date of this publication — June 2026 — that is an unbroken suspension lasting approximately 28 years and 2 months.
Cheryl Cozza Milano is not a practicing attorney. She has not been a practicing attorney in the lifetime of a child born the year her permanent suspension took effect. She has been in a state of delinquent suspension while the internet was invented, while smartphones became ubiquitous, while an entire generation grew up, graduated college, and entered the workforce.
Her law license is not on sabbatical. It is not in a temporary holding pattern. Under New York State law, an attorney who remains suspended and delinquent for decades without seeking reinstatement is, functionally, out of the profession.
What "Suspended, Delinquent" Actually Means
New York State has a clear attorney discipline framework administered through the Appellate Division departments. Suspension is not a pause — it is an active prohibition on the practice of law. Under New York Judiciary Law § 90, a suspended attorney may not:
- Appear in court on behalf of a client
- Give legal advice for compensation
- Draft legal documents as an attorney
- Hold themselves out as a licensed attorney
- Threaten legal action in their capacity as a licensed attorney
The word "delinquent" in Cheryl Cozza Milano's registration status indicates that she has also failed to meet the registration and continuing legal education requirements mandated of all New York attorneys — including those who are not actively practicing. It signals not merely suspension, but a sustained failure to engage with the bar's administrative processes even at the most basic level.
In short: the New York bar hasn't lost track of Cheryl Cozza Milano. She simply has not come back.
What the Court Found: Federal Felony, Student Loan Fraud, and a Guilty Plea
The Appellate Division's March 30, 1998 order — publicly available at caselaw.findlaw.com — discloses the full record behind Cheryl Cozza Milano's suspension. It is not a story of a technical violation or an administrative error. It is a story of federal financial crimes, a guilty plea in open court, and a judgment that included restitution for defrauding a student loan program.
On January 24, 1997, Cheryl Ann Cozza appeared before the Honorable Charles L. Brieant of the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York and pleaded guilty to structuring transactions for the purpose of evading Currency Transaction Reports, in violation of 31 U.S.C. § 5324(a)(3) — a federal felony.
Structuring is not a paperwork error. It is the deliberate, intentional breaking up of financial transactions into smaller amounts to stay below the $10,000 reporting threshold that triggers mandatory bank Currency Transaction Reports to federal authorities. It is a financial crime associated with tax evasion and the concealment of money from government oversight. It requires knowing intent. It cannot be done accidentally.
She was sentenced to three years of federal probation, with three months served under home confinement. She was also ordered to pay $20,000 in restitution to the New York State Higher Education Services Corporation — the state agency that administers student loan programs — reflecting an additional finding of financial misconduct related to her student loans.
The Grievance Committee for the Ninth Judicial District brought two formal charges:
- Charge One: Conviction of a serious crime under Judiciary Law § 90(4)(d)
- Charge Two: Conduct involving dishonesty, fraud, deceit, or misrepresentation adversely reflecting on her fitness to practice law
A Special Referee sustained both charges. The Appellate Division confirmed them. Cheryl Ann Cozza was suspended from the practice of law for two years commencing March 30, 1998, with the right to apply for reinstatement no sooner than six months before the end of that period — provided she could demonstrate compliance, rehabilitation, and fitness.
She never applied. The two-year suspension became permanent by default. And here we are, 28 years later.
Why This Investigation Exists
The Ethics Reporter exists to document the gap between how people present themselves and who they actually are — particularly when that gap is used to harm others.
This investigation began after small business owners in the Westchester County area reported encounters with Cheryl Cozza Milano in which she invoked her status as an attorney — specifically, her claimed legal credentials — as a tool of intimidation. In one documented case, she left negative reviews of a local small business and accompanied those reviews with language referencing her legal background as implied leverage.
That conduct takes on a different dimension knowing what the public record shows: Cheryl Cozza Milano was suspended because she pleaded guilty to federal financial crimes. The Appellate Division found that her conduct involved dishonesty, fraud, deceit, and misrepresentation. A federal judge ordered her to pay restitution for student loan misconduct. These are not the credentials of someone with standing to invoke the authority of the law against others.
When a small business owner receives a message or review from someone identifying themselves as an attorney, it carries weight. It is designed to. The implied threat is clear: I have legal tools at my disposal. I can make your life difficult. You should be afraid of me.
The problem, when the "attorney" in question has been suspended for 28 years, is that this is not just aggressive behavior — it may constitute fraud. It may constitute the unauthorized practice of law. At minimum, it is a deliberate misrepresentation designed to create fear and obtain leverage.
That is the story The Ethics Reporter is telling. And it begins with a public record that anyone — including every small business owner Cheryl Cozza Milano has ever threatened — could have looked up.
The Public Has a Right to Know
Attorney disciplinary records in New York are public. The New York State Unified Court System publishes them specifically so that clients, opposing parties, and members of the public can verify the standing of any attorney they encounter. This system only works if people use it.
Cheryl Cozza Milano's bar record has been a matter of public record since 1997. It is findable, free, and definitive. But most people — small business owners facing an aggressive review campaign, individuals receiving threatening correspondence — don't know to look. They assume that if someone calls themselves an attorney, they probably are one.
This series is here to correct that assumption, and to ensure that a documented public record gets the visibility it has always deserved.
What Comes Next
In Part 2 of this series, The Ethics Reporter examines the specific conduct that brought Cheryl Cozza Milano to our attention: her use of negative online reviews combined with implied legal threats against small business owners in the Westchester County area, and the pattern of behavior that emerges when someone with a law degree — but no law license — decides to use that credential as a weapon.
Next: Part 2 — "I'm an Attorney": How Cheryl Cozza Milano Used Legal Credentials to Intimidate Small Businesses
The Ethics Reporter is an independent, reader-supported publication. We have no advertisers and no corporate sponsors. If this reporting matters to you, please support us at theethicsreporter.com/donate — even $1 keeps this work going.
📢 The Ethics Reporter relies entirely on reader support to keep this journalism free and independent. No ads, no corporate money — just you. If this reporting matters to you, please consider donating even $1 at theethicsreporter.com/donate — it genuinely keeps us going. Thank you.