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 PHvNE: 313-963-5553 FAX: 313-963-5571 WWW.ADBMICH.ORG

NOTICE OF SUSPENSION WITH CONDITION (By Consent)

Case No. 12-106-GA Notice Issued: December 20,2012

Douglas A. Merrow, P 35805, Kalamazoo, Michigan, by the Attorney Discipline Board Kalamazoo County Hearing Panel #2.

1. Suspension - Five Years 2. Effective December 27,2012 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 he abandoned his duty to supervise his employees, resulting in a loss in excess of

$120,000.00 in funds which should have been maintained in trust, in violation of MRPC 5.3(b); failed to adequately prepare for his clients' workers compensation matters, in violation of MRPC 1.1 (b); neglected his clients' legal matters by failing to appear for scheduled hearings, in violation

of MRPC 1.1 (c); engaged in conduct that is prejudicial to the administration of justice, in violation of MRPC 84(c), and MCR 9.104(A)(1); engaged in conduct which exposed the legal profession or the courts to obloquy, contempt, censure, or reproach, in violation of MCR 9.104(A)(2); and, engaged in conduct that is contrary to justice, ethics, or good morals, in violation of MCR 9,104(A)(3).

In accordance with the stipulation, the hearing panel ordered that respondent's license to practice law in Michigan be suspended for five years and that he be subject to a condition relevant to the alleged misconduct. Costs were assessed in the amount of $762.30.

Dated:

DEC 2(J 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.