MEMBERS JONATHAN E. LAUDERBACH CHAIRPERSON MICHAEL B. RIZIK, JR. VICE-CHAIRPERSON BARBARA WILLIAMS FORNEY SECRETARY KAREN D. O’DONOGHUE LINDA S. HOTCHKISS, MD
MICHAEL S. HOHAUSER PETER A. SMIT ALAN GERSHEL LINDA M. ORLANS
STATE OF MICHIGAN ATTORNEY DISCIPLINE BOARD
333 WEST FORT STREET, SUITE 1700
MARK A. ARMITAGE EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR — WENDY A. NEELEY DEPUTY DIRECTOR — KAREN M. DALEY ASSOCIATE COUNSEL — SHERRY MIFSUD OFFICE ADMINISTRATOR —
ALLYSON M. PLOURDE CASE MANAGER OWEN R. MONTGOMERY CASE MANAGER — JULIE M. LOISELLE RECEPTIONIST/SECRETARY —
DETROIT, MICHIGAN 48226-3147
PHONE: 313-963-5553
www.adbmich.org
NOTICE OF DISBARMENT Case No. 20-82-RD Notice Issued: August 25, 2021 Vincent DeMarti Porter, P 71535, Allen Park, Michigan, by the Attorney Discipline Board Disbarred, Effective August 21, 2021 In a reciprocal discipline proceeding initiated under MCR 9.120(C), the Grievance Administrator filed a certified copy of an order of disbarment entered by the Illinois Supreme Court on September 21, 2020, in In Re: Vincent DeMarti Porter, M.R. 030289.
An Order Regarding Imposition of Reciprocal Discipline was entered by the Board on December 10, 2020, directing the parties to file any objections to the imposition of reciprocal discipline within 21 days, pursuant to MCR 9.120(C)(2)(b). On January 13, 2021, respondent filed untimely objections to the imposition of reciprocal discipline on the basis that he was denied due process in the original proceedings. The Grievance Administrator filed a response on January 19, 2021, asserting that respondent was in default because he failed to file his objection within 21 days, as set forth in MCR 9.120(C)(6), thus the Board must impose comparable discipline. The Grievance Administrator further argued that respondent was afforded due process, and that the comparable discipline of disbarment was appropriate.
On February 2, 2021, respondent filed a Motion to Set Aside Entry of Default, and the Grievance Administrator filed a response opposing respondent’s request on February 22, 2021. On April 12, 2021, the Board issued an Order of Disbarment that, in part, denied respondent’s motion because he failed to establish good cause for setting aside the default. The order further indicated that the Board had concluded that respondent was afforded due process of law in the course of the original proceeding, and it had not been shown that the imposition of comparable discipline in Michigan would be clearly inappropriate. As a result, the Board ordered that respondent be disbarred from the practice of law in Michigan, effective May 11, 2021.
On May 10, 2021, respondent filed a motion seeking reconsideration of the Board’s April 12, 2021 Order of Disbarment and a petition for a stay of the Board’s order. An order granting an interim stay was issued on May 11, 2021, pending further consideration by the Board. On July 23, 2021, the Board entered an Order Denying Respondent’s Motion for Reconsideration which dissolved the interim stay and disbarred respondent from the practice of law in Michigan, effective August 21, 2021. Costs were assessed in the amount of $1,519.65.