MEMBERS LOUANN VAN DER WIELE CHAIRPERSON REV. MICHAEL MURRAY VICE-CHAIRPERSON DULCE M. FULLER SECRETARY JAMES A. FINK JOHN W. INHULSEN JONATHAN E. LAUDERBACH BARBARA WILLIAMS FORNEY KAREN D. O'DONOGHUE MICHAEL B. RIZIK, JR.
STATE OF MICHIGAN ATTORNEY DISCIPLINE BOARD
211 WEST FORT STREET, SUITE 1410 DETROIT, MICHIGAN 48226-3236 PHONE: 313-963-5553 I FAX: 313-963-5571
MARK A. ARMITAGE EXECl)TlVE DIRECTOR WENDY A. NEELEY DEPl)TY DIRECTOR SHERRY L. MIFSUD OFFICE ADMINISTRATOR ALLYSON M. PLOURDE CASE MANAGER OWEN R. MONTGOMERY CASE MANAGER JULIE M. LOISELLE RECEPTIONISTISECRETARY
NOTICE OF REPRIMAND WITH CONDITIONS (By Consent)
Case No. 16-13-GA Notice Issued: October 6,2016 Catherine L. Wolfe, P 37148, Honor, Michigan, by the Attorney Discipline Board Grand Traverse County Hearing Panel #1.
1. Reprimand 2. Effective October 6, 2016 The respondent and the Grievance Administrator filed a stipulation for a consent order of discipline, in accordance with MCR 9.115(F)(5), which was approved by the Attorney Grievance Commission and accepted by the hearing panel. The stipulation contained respondent's admissions to the allegations that she committed professional misconduct in her representation of two clients, as well as in her communications with a third potential client. The alleged misconducts included frivolous filings, lack of candor with the court, and abusive conduct.
Based upon respondent's admissions and the stipulation of the parties, the panel found that respondent failed to communicate with the client, in violation of MRPC 1.4(a); failed to provide sufficient information to the client so that the client could make informed decisions regarding the representation, in violation of MRPC 1.4(b); filed frivolous pleadings asserting issues that lacked merit, in violation of MRPC 3.1; failed to expedite litigation by filing frivolous claims, in violation of MRPC 3.2; engaged in undignified or discourteous conduct toward the tribunal, in violation of MRPC 3.5(d); and engaged in conduct that is discourteous and disrespectful to persons involved in the legal process, in violation of MRPC 6.5(a). The panel also found that respondent violated MCR 9.104(1) and (2); and MRPC 8.4(c).
In accordance with the stipulation of the parties, the panel ordered that respondent be reprimanded. The panel also ordered that respondent be subject to conditions relevant to the admitted misconduct. Costs w assessed in the amount of $771.98.
Mark A. Armitage Dated: October 6, 2016