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 MIClllGAN 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 '~~81v~/nlJk,W SHERRY L. MIFSUD OFFICE ADMINISTRATOR JEN~mJ'GkETTY KATHLEEN PHILLIPS CASE MANAGER ALLYSON M. PLOURDE CASE MANAGER JULIE M. LOISELLE RECEPTIONIST

www.adbmlch.org

FINAL NOTICE OF SUSPENSION WITH CONDITION Case No. 14-54-GA Notice Issued: August 7,2015

Susan M. Eifler, P 57222, Battle Creek, Michigan, by the Attorney Discipline Board increasing discipline from a Reprimand to a 30-Day Suspension.

1. Suspension - 30 Days 2. Effective August 5,2015 The respondent appeared at the hearing but was found to be in default for failing to timely respond to a request for investigation and to answer the formal complaint. Based on respondent's default, the panel found that she failed to answer a request for investigation, in violation of MCR 9.104(7), MCR 9.113(A), and MCR 9.113(B)(2); and knowingly failed to respond to a lawful demand for information from a disciplinary authority, in violation of MRPC 8.1 (a)(2). The panel also found that respondent violated MRPC 8.4(c) and MCR 9.104(1)-(3).

The panel ordered that respondent be reprimanded and be subject to conditions relevant to the established misconduct.

The Grievance Administrator filed a petition for review, seeking an increase in discipline. A review hearing was held and, on July 7, 2015, the Board issued its order increasing discipline from a reprimand to a 30-day-suspension of respondent's license to practice law in Michigan. The Board also modified the conditions imposed by the panel. Total costs were assessed in the amount of $2,045.36.

Dated:

AfJG - 7 III

 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.