Notices

Decision Information

Decision Content

MEMBERS THOMAS G. KIENBAUM

CHAIRPERSON JAMES M. CAMERON, JR.

VICE-CHAIRPERSON SYLVIA P. WHITMER, Ph.D.

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 DETROl1 MICHIGAN 48226-3236 PHuNE: 313-963-5553 FAX: 313-963-5571 WWW.ADBMICH.ORG

NOTICE OF DISBARMENT AND RESTITUTION Case No. 12-99-GA Notice Issued: January 16, 2013

Susan S. Pushman, P 53574, Lincoln Park, Michigan, by Attorney Discipline Board Tri-County Hearing Panel #3.

1. Disbarred 2. Effective January 3, 20131 Respondent did not appear at the hearing and was found to be in default for failing to file an answer to the formal complaint. Based on respondent's default, the panel found that respondent, in five matters, did not provide the services she was retained to perform. In one of those matters, respondent did not provide additional information to the Grievance Administrator as requested, and failed to file answers to four requests for investigation served upon her by the Grievance Administrator, in violation of MCR 9.104(7). As a result of those acts or omissions, respondent was found to have engaged in conduct prejudicial to the administration of justice, in violation of MCR 9.1 04(1) and MRPC 8.4(c); exposed the legal profession or the courts to obloquy,

contempt, censure, or reproach, in violation of MCR 9.104(2); violated the standards or rules of professional responsibility adopted by the Supreme Court, contrary to MCR 9.104(4); neglected

legal matters, in violation of MRPC 1.1 (c); failed to act with reasonable diligence and promptness in representing her clients, in violation of MRPC 1.3; failed to keep her clients reasonably informed

about the status of their matters and comply promptly with reasonable requests for information, in violation of MRPC 1.4(a); failed to explain a matter to the extent reasonably necessary to permit her clients to make informed decisions regarding their representation, in violation of MRPC 1.4(b);

failed to take reasonable steps to protect her clients' interests and refund any unearned fee upon termination of representation, in violation of MRPC1.16(d); failed to respond to a lawful demand

for information from a disciplinary authority, in violation of MRPC 8.1 (a)(2); and violated or attempted to violate the Rules of Professional Conduct, contrary to MRPC 8.4(a).

The panel ordered that respondent be disbarred from the practice of law in Michigan. The panel also ordered that respondent pay restitution in the aggregate amount of $4,370.00. Costs were assessed in the amount of $1,775.71.

Dated: ______-.;..;:~

1 Respondent has been continuously suspended from the practice of law in Michigan since December 27, 2011. Please see Notice of Interim Suspension Pursuant to MCR 9.115(H)(1) issued January 17, 2012.

 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.