MEMBERS WILLIAM J. DANHOF
CHAIRPERSON THOMAS G. KIENBAUM
VICE· CHAIRPERSON WILLIAM L. MATIHEWS, CPA
SECRETARY ANDREA L. SOLAK ROSALIND E. GRIFFIN, M.D. CARL E. VER BEEK CRAIG H. LUBBEN JAMES M. CAMERON, JR. SYLVIA P. WHITMER, Ph.D
STATE OF MICHIGAN ATTORNEY DISCIPLINE BOARD
JOHN F. VAN BOLT EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR MARK A. ARMITAGE DEPUTY DIRECTOR JENNIFER M. PETIY LEGAL ASSISTANT
211 WEST FORT ST. SUITE 1410 DETROIT 6 MICHIGAN 48226-3236 PH NE: 313-963-5553 FAX: 313-963-5571 WWW.ADBMICH.ORG
NOTICE OF SUSPENSION AND RESTITUTION WITH CONDITION (By Consent)
Case Nos. 09-95-GA; 10-73-RD Notice Issued: October 19, 2010
Asad S. Farah, P 53900, Monroe, Michigan, by the Attorney Discipline Board Tri-County Hearing Panel #3.
1. Suspension - 180 Days 2. Effective October 16, 2010 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. Respondent pleaded no contest to the allegations that he committed professional misconduct by failing to act with reasonable diligence and promptness in representing his clients in four cases; neglecting three of those cases; failing to keep his clients reasonably informed about the status of their matters and comply promptly with reasonable requests for information. In two of these matters, respondent was also alleged to have provided incompetent representation; failed to refund the unearned portion of the retainers; and
failed to make reasonable efforts to expedite the litigation consistent with the interests ofthe clients. Additionally, with respect to ADB Case No. 10-73-RD, the stipulation contained respondent's admission that his license to practice law in Ohio had been suspended for 12 months with 12 months stayed on conditions in an action titled Toledo Bar Association v Asad Farah, Case No.
2009-2330.
Respondent was charged with violations of MCR 9.1 04(A)(2), (4) and (7); MCR 9.113(A) and (B)(2); and Michigan Rules of Professional Conduct 1.1; 1.1 (c); 1.3; 1.4(a); 1.16(d); 3.2;
8.1(a)(2); 8.4(a) and (c).
In accordance with the stipulation, the hearing panel ordered that respondent's license to practice law in Michigan should be suspended for 180 days and that he pay restitution in the aggregate amount of $2,000.00. Respondent was also ordered to be subject to a condition relevant
to the alleged misconduct. Costs were assessed in the amount of $796.28.
Dated: _______