Notices

Decision Information

Decision Content

MEMBERS JAMES M. CAMERON, JR.

CHAIRPERSON LAWRENCE G. CAMPBELL

VICE-CHAIRPERSON DULCE M. FULLER

SECRETARY ROSALIND E. GRIFFIN, M.D. SYLVIA P. WHITMER, Ph.D LOUANN VAN DER WIELE MICHAEL MURRAY JAMES A. FINK JOHN w. INHULSEN

STATE OF MICHIGAN

ATTORNEY DISCIPLINE BOARD

211 WEST FORT STREET, SUITE1410 DETROIT, MICHIGAN 48226-3236 PHONE: 313ยท963-5553 I FAX: 313-963-5571

MARK A. ARMITAGE EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR

WENDY A. NEELEY DEPUTY DIRECTOR SHERRY L. MIFSUD OFFICE ADMINISTRA TOR JENNIFER M. PETTY PARALEGAL KATHLEEN PHILLIPS CASE MANAGER ALLY SON M. PLOURDE CASE MANAGER JULIE M. LOISELLE RECEPTIONIST

www.adbmich.org

NOTICE OF SUSPENSION AND RESTITUTION Case Nos. 14-8-GA; 14-26-GA; 14-53-GA Notice Issued: October 8,2015

Marvin Barnett, P 34033, Detroit, Michigan, by the Attorney Discipline Board Tri-County Hearing Panel #27. 1. Suspension - Three Years 2. Effective October 3, 2015 The three formal complaints were consolidated for hearing and respondent filed answers to each complaint and appeared at the hearings. The hearing panel found that respondent neglected a legal matter, in violation of MRPC 1.1 (c); failed to seek the lawful objectives of his client through reasonably available means permitted by law, in violation of MRPC 1.2(a); failed to act with reasonable diligence in violation of MRPC 1.3; failed to communicate with his client in violation of

MRPC 1.4(a) and (b); failed to keep client funds separate from his business funds, in violation MRPC 1.15(c ); failed to deposit client funds into an IOlT A account, in violation of MRPC 1.15(g); requested a person other than his client to refrain from voluntarily giving relevant information to another party, in violation of MRPC 3.4(f); used means that have no substantial purpose other than to embarrass, delay, or burden a third person, or used methods of obtaining evidence that violated the legal rights of such a person, in violation of MRPC 4.4; and failed to treat with courtesy and respect all persons involved in the legal process, in violation of MRPC 6.5(a). The panel also found that respondent failed to provide information demanded by the Grievance Administrator, in violation of MRPC 8.1 (a)(2); engaged in conduct which violated the Rules of Professional Conduct, contrary to MRPC 8.4(a); engaged in conduct which involved dishonesty, fraud, deceit, misrepresentation, or violation of the criminal law, where such conduct reflects adversely on the lawyer's honesty,

trustworthiness, or fitness as a lawyer, contrary to MRPC 8.4(b); engaged in conduct prejudicial to the administration of justice, in violation of MCR 9.104(1); exposed the legal profession orthe courts to obloquy, contempt, censure or reproach, in violation of MCR 9.104(2); engaged in conduct that is contrary to justice, ethics, honesty or good morals, in violation of MCR 9.104(3); violated the standards or rules of professional responsibility adopted by the Supreme Court, contrary to MCR 9.104(4); engaged in conduct in that violates a criminal law of a state and the United States, to wit, MCl 750.122(3) and (6), in violation of MCR 9.104(5); made knowing misrepresentations of facts or circumstances in his answer to the request for investigation, in violation of MCR 9.104(6); and made misrepresentations in his answer to the request for investigation, in violation of MCR 9.113(A).

October 8, 2015

STATE OF MICHIGAN. ATTORNEY DISCIPLINE BOARD

Page 2

The hearing panel ordered that respondent's license to practice law in Michigan be suspended for three years and that he pay restitution in the aggregate amount of $67,500.00. Respondent filed a motion to stay he effective date of the order of suspension and restitution but that motion was denied by the panel on October 2,2015. Total costs were assessed in the amount of $8,425.35. ' ~.Ll-~~~=~ ark A. Armitage . OCT u 8 2.J.15 Dated: ________

 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.