Notices

Decision Information

Decision Content

MEMBERS THOMAS G. KIENBAUM

CHAIRPERSON JAMES M. CAMERON, JR. VICE-CHAIRPERSON SYLVIA P. WHITMER, PhD.

SECRETARY ROSALIND E. GRIFFIN, M.D. CARL E. VER BEEK CRAIG H. LUBBEN LAWRENCE G. CAMPBEll

DULCE M. FUllER LOUANN VAN DER WIELE

STATE OF MICHIGAN ATTORNEY DISCIPLINE BOARD

JOHN F. VAN BOLT EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR MARK A. ARMITAGE DEPUTY DIRECTOR

JENNIFER M. PETTY LEGAL ASSISTANT

211 WEST FORT ST. SUITE 1410 DETROI1. MICHIGAN 48226-3236 PHuNE: 313-963-5553 FAX: 313-963-5571

WWW.ADBMICH.ORG

NOTICE OF SUSPENSION AND RESTITUTION WITH CONDITION (By Consent)

Case No. 12-45-GA Notice Issued: December 18,2012

Thomas A. Mengesha, P 59421, Detroit, Michigan, by the Attorney Discipline Board TriĀ­ County Hearing Panel #8.

1. Suspension - 180 Days 2. Effective December 18, 2012 The respondent and the Grievance Administrator filed a stipulation for a consent order of discipline in accordance with MCR 9.115(F)(5) which was approved by the Attorney Grievance Commission and accepted by the hearing panel. Respondent pleaded no contest to the allegations that, in his capacity as trustee for a trust, he took personal loans (approximately $95,000.00) from the trust without disclosing the terms of the loans in writing to the owner of the trust, or obtaining the owner's consent in writing. Additionally, the loan arrangement between respondent and the

Trust did not provide for a rate or schedule for the return of the personal loans taken by respondent.

Based on the stipulation of the parties, the panel found that respondent had entered into a business transaction with a client which transaction and terms were not fair and reasonable to the client and were not fully disclosed and transmitted to the client in a manner that can reasonably be understood by the client, in violation of MRPC 1.8(a)(1); entered into a business transaction with a client in which the client does not consent to the transactions and its terms in writing, in violation of MRPC 1 .8(a)(3); and, engaged in conduct that is a violation of the of the Rules of Professional Conduct, contrary to MRPC 8.4(c).

In accordance with the stipulation, the hearing panel ordered that respondent's license to practice law in Michigan be suspended for 180 days and that he pay restitution in the amount of $101,871.09. Costs were assessed in the amount of $825.28.

Bolt DEC 1 8,2.012 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.