Notices

Decision Information

Decision Content

MEMBERS LOUANN VAN DERWIELE CHAIRPERSON LAWRENCE G. CAMPBELL VICE-CHAIRPERSON DULCE M. FULLER SECRETARY ROSALIND E. GRIFFIN, M.D. REV. MICHAEL MURRAY JAMES A. FINK JOHN W. INHULSEN JONATHAN E. LAUDERBACH BARBARA WILLIAMS FORNEY

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 EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR

WENDY A. NEELEY DEPUTY DIRECTOR

SHERRY L. MIFSUD OFFICE ADMINISTRATOR

JENNIFER M. PETTY PARALEGAL

ALLY SON M. PLOURDE CASE MANAGER

OWEN R. MONTGOMERY CASE MANAGER

JULIE M. LOISELLE RECEPTIONIST/SECRETARY

www.adbmich.org

NOTICE OF DISBARMENT Case No. 16-24-GA Notice Issued: July 27, 2016

Matthew David Herman, P 7 4872, Grand Rapids, Michigan, by the Attorney Discipline Board Kent County Hearing Panel #4.

1. Disbarment 2. Effective July 27, 2016. Respondent did appear at the hearing and was found to be in default for failing to file an answer to the formal complaint. Based on respondent's default, the hearing panel found that respondent failed to hold property of his client in connection with his representation separate from his own property, in violation of MRPC 1.15(d); commingled funds by depositing his personal funds into the IOLTA which did not represent service charges, in violation of MRPC 1.15(f); failed to diligently represent his client's interests, in violation of MRPC 1.1 (c) and 1.3; failed to seek the lawful objectives of his client, in violation of MRPC 1.2(a); engaged in conduct involving dishonesty, fraud, deceit, misrepresentation, or violation of the criminal law, such that his conduct reflected adversely on his honesty, trustworthiness or fitness as a lawyer, in violation of MRPC 8.4(b); engaged in conduct that exposes the legal profession to obloquy, contempt, censure, or reproach, in violation of MCR 9.10 4(2); engaged in conduct that is contrary to justice, ethics, honesty, or good morals, in violation of MCR 9.10 4(3); and, violated or attempted to violate the Rules of Professional Conduct, in violation of MCR 9.1 04(4).

The panel ordered that respondent be disbarred from the practice of law in Michigan. Costs were assessed in the amount of $1,941.28.

1tu~9~ ark A. Armitage Dated: - =J=O!t·:: .-_.;t;:,:i: .....7:.'. _-2£m.-'=Ji_

 You are being directed to the most recent version of the statute which may not be the version considered at the time of the judgment.