MEMBERS JAMES M. CAMERON, JR.
CHAIRPERSON CRAIG H. LUBBEN
VICE-CHAIRPERSON SYLVIA P. WHITMER, Ph.D.
SECRETARY ROSALIND E. GRIFFIN, M.D.
CARL E. VER BEEK LAWRENCE G. CAMPBELL
DULCE M. FULLER LOUANN VAN DER WIELE MICHAEL MURRAY
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 DISMISSAL
MARK A. ARMITAGE EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR WENDY A. NEELEY DEPUTY DIRECTOR
SHERRY L. MIFSUD OFFICE ADMINISTRATOR
JENNIFER M. PETTY PARALEGAL
KATHLEEN PHILLIPS CASE MANAGER
ALLYSON M. PLOURDE CASE MANAGER JULIE M. LOISELLE RECEPTIONIST
Case No. 12-81-GA Dennis H. Snyder, P 29791, Grand Blanc, Michigan, by the Attorney Discipline Board Genesee County Hearing Panel #4.
1. Dismissal 2. Effective July 11, 2014 Formal Complaint 12-81-GA alleged that respondent, in a criminal matter, failed to keep his client reasonably informed about the status of the matter and comply promptly with reasonable requests for information, in violation of MRPC 1.4(a); failed to explain the matter to the extent reasonably necessary to permit his client to make informed decisions concerning the representation; in violation of MRPC 1.4(b); entered into, charged, and collected a clearly excessive fee, in violation of MRPC 1.5(a); failed to hold property of clients separate from his own property, in violation of MRPC 1.15(d); failed to exercise independent professional judgment and render candid advice, in violation of MPRC 2.1; engaged in conduct involving dishonesty, fraud, deceit, or misrepresentation where such conduct reflects adversely on the lawyer's honesty, trustworthiness, or fitness as a lawyer, in violation of MRPC 8.4(b); engaged in conduct that exposes the legal profession or the courts to obloquy, contempt, censure, or reproach, in violation of MCR 9.104(2); and engaged in conduct that is contrary to justice, ethics, honesty, or good morals, in violation of MCR 9.104(3).
During the proceedings, a majority of the allegations in the formal complaint were dismissed, leaving only the alleged viqlations of MRPC 1.4(a) and (b). With respect to MRPC 1.4(a), the hearing panel found that while there was evidence of communication problems, it did not rise to the level of misconduct by a preponderance of the evidence. The hearing panel also found no evidentiary support for the alleged violation of MRPC 1.4(b). Accordingly, the hearing panel unanimously concluded that the Grievance Administrator had not met the burden of and ordered that Formal Complaint 12-81-GA be dismissed. No costs were assessed against respondent.
Mark A. Armitage Dated:_J_U_L_,_,_2_"' __