MEMBERS WILLIAM J. DANHOFf I I . CHAIIRPERSON THOMAS G. KIIENBAUM
VIICE--·CHAIIRPERSON ROSALIIND E.. GRIIFifFfiIIN,, M.D.
SECRETARY WIILLIIAM L.. MATTIHHEEWS ANDREA L.. SOLAK CARL E.. VER BEEK CRAIIG H.. LUBBEN JAMES M. CAMERON, JR.. SYLVIIA P.. WHIITMER,, Ph..D
STATE OF MICHIGAN ATTORNEY DISCIPLINE BOARD
JOHN Ff .. VAN BOLT EXECUTIIVE DIIRECTOR MARK A.. ARMIITAGE DEPUT7Y DIIRECTOR JENNIIiFfER M.. PETTI Y LEGAL ASSIISTANT
211 WEST Ff ORT ST.. SUIITE 1410 DETRROOITIIT. PH 6..,. MICHIGAN 48226-3236 v NE:: 313-963-5553 FfAAX:: 313-963-5571 WWW..ADBMIICH..ORG
NOTICE OF REVOCATION AND RESTITUTION Case No. 11-42-GA Notice Issued: August 17, 2011
Douglas C. Cunningham, P 3179B, Lansing, Michigan, by Attorney Discipline Board Ingham County Hearing Panel #4. 1. Revocation 2. Effective August 16, 2011 1 Respondent diid not appear at the hearing and was in default for failing to timely file an answer to the formal complaint. Based on that default, the hearing panell found that respondent neglected a legal matter; faiilled to properly safeguard a cash advance; failed to promptly payor deliver any funds or other property that his client was entiitlled to receive; faiilled to seek the lawful objectives of his client through reasonably available means; failed to act with reasonable diligence and promptness in representing his client; faiilled to keep his client reasonably informed about the status of his matter; failed to explain the mater to the extent reasonably necessary to permit his clientto make informed decisions regarding the representation; faiilled to withdraw from representiing his client where that representatiion woulld result in a viollatiion of the Rules of Professional Conduct; and faiilled to render candid advice.
Respondent''s conduct was in viollatiion of MCR 9.104(A)(1)-(4); and Michigan Rules of Professional Conduct 1.1(c); 1.2(a); 1.3; 1.4(a) and (b); 1.15(b)(3); 1.15(d); 1.16(a)(1); 2.1; and B.4(a)-(c).
The panel ordered that respondent''s license to practice law in Michigan be revoked and that he pay restitution in the amount of $B,445.62. Costs were assessed in the amount of $1 ,722.66.
Datted:: --L"z.'.-._ ________ _
1 Respondent has been contiinuouslly suspended from the practiice of llaw iin Miichiigan siince January 9,, 200B.. Pllease see Notiice of Suspensiion Wiith Condiitiion (By Consent), iissued January 16, 200B..