MEMBERS THOMAS G. KIENBAUM
CHAIRPERSON JAMES M. CAMERON, JR. VICE-CHAIRPERSON ROSALIND E. GRIFFIN, M.D.
SECRETARY ANDREA L. SOLAK CARL E. VER BEEK CRAIG H. LUBBEN SYLVIA P. WHITMER, Ph.D LAWRENCE G. CAMPBELL DULCE M. FULLER
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 DETROIT, MICHIGAN 48226ยท3236 PHONE: 313-963-5553 FAX: 313-963-5571
DISMISSAL Case No. 11-16-GA Rodney W. Sabourin, P 23760, Bay City, Michigan, by the Attorney Discipline Board, affirming Kalamazoo County Hearing Panel #4's order of dismissal.
1. Dismissal 2. Effective February 18, 2012 Respondent was alleged to have committed professional misconduct by making false statements to a tribunal, in violation of MRPC 3.3(a)(1); failing to disclose a material fact to a tribunal, in violation of MRPC 3.3(a)(2); making false statements to a disciplinary authority, in violation of MRPC 8.1 (a)(1); knowingly making a false statement of material fact or law to a third person, in violation of MRPC 4.1; unlawfully obstructing another party's access to evidence, in violation of MRPC 3.4(a); and failing to hold property in which an interest is claimed by two or more people separate from the lawyer's own property, in violation of MRPC 1.15(d). The formal complaint also alleged that respondent engaged in conduct involving dishonesty, fraud, deceit, and misrepresentation, or a violation of the criminal law, where such conduct reflects adversely on the lawyer's honesty, trustworthiness, or fitness as a lawyer, contrary to MRPC 8.4(b); engaged in conduct prejudicial to the administration of justice, in violation of MRPC 8.4(c) and MCR 9.1 04(A)(1); engaged in conduct that exposes the legal profession or the courts to obloquy, contempt, censure, or reproach, in violation of MCR 9.1 04(A)(2); and engaged in conduct that is contrary to justice, ethics, honesty, or good morals, in violation of MCR 9. 10 4(A)(3).
The hearing panel found that the Grievance Administrator did not prove the allegations in Formal Complaint 11-16-GA by a preponderance of the evidence and the complaint was dismissed.
The Grievance Administrator filed a petition for review and, upon review, the Attorney Discipline Board issued its order on January 20, 2012, affirming the hearing panel's order of dismissal. No costs were assessed against respondent.
Dated:'--________