Notices

Decision Information

Decision Content

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 48226-3236 PHONE: 313-963-5553 FAX: 313-963-5571

WWW.ADBMICH.ORG

NOTICE OF DISBARMENT (By Consent)

Case Nos. 11-60-AI; 11-140-JC Notice Issued: February 17, 2012

Charles S. Rominger, Jr., P 26899, Grand Rapids, Michigan, by the Attorney Discipline Board Kent County Hearing Panel #4.

1. Disbarment 2. Effective May 10, 2011 1 Respondent pleaded guilty to one count of felony tax evasion, in violation of 26 USC ยง7201, in the U.S. District Courtforthe Western District of Michigan. In accordance with MCR 9.120(8)(1), respondent's license to practice law in Michigan is suspended effective May 10, 2011, the date of his felony conviction.

A discipline proceeding was instituted by the Grievance Administrator in accordance with MCR 9.120(8)(3). On December 27, 2011, the respondent and Grievance Administrator filed a stipulation for 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. The panel found that, based on his felony conviction, respondent had committed professional misconduct in violation of MCR 9.1 04(A)(5).

In accordance with the stipulation of the parties, the panel ordered that respondent be disbarred from the practice of law in Michigan, retroactive to May 10, 2011, the date of his felony conviction. Costs were assessed in the amount of $1,238.13.

1 Respondent has been continuously suspended from the practice of law in Michigan since May 10, 2011. Please see Notice of Automatic Interim Suspension issued May 18,

 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.