MEMBERS JONATHAN E. LAUDERBACH CHAIRPERSON MICHAEL B. RIZIK, JR. VICE-CHAIRPERSON BARBARA WILLIAMS FORNEY SECRETARY KAREN D. O’DONOGHUE LINDA S. HOTCHKISS, MD
MICHAEL S. HOHAUSER PETER A. SMIT ALAN GERSHEL LINDA M. ORLANS
STATE OF MICHIGAN ATTORNEY DISCIPLINE BOARD
333 WEST FORT STREET, SUITE 1700
MARK A. ARMITAGE EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR — WENDY A. NEELEY DEPUTY DIRECTOR — KAREN M. DALEY ASSOCIATE COUNSEL — SHERRY MIFSUD OFFICE ADMINISTRATOR —
ALLYSON M. PLOURDE CASE MANAGER OWEN R. MONTGOMERY CASE MANAGER — JULIE M. LOISELLE RECEPTIONIST/SECRETARY —
DETROIT, MICHIGAN 48226-3147
PHONE: 313-963-5553
www.adbmich.org
NOTICE OF REPRIMAND WITH CONDITIONS (By Consent)
Case Nos. 20-56-JC; 20-57-GA Notice Issued: February 9, 2021 Craig L. Sigworth, P 41247, Bloomfield Hills, Michigan, by the Attorney Discipline Board Tri-County Hearing Panel #76.
Reprimand, Effective February 6, 2021 The respondent and the Grievance Administrator filed a Stipulation for Consent Order of Reprimand With Conditions, in accordance with MCR 9.115(F)(5), which was approved by the Attorney Grievance Commission and accepted by the hearing panel. The stipulation contained respondent’s admission that he was convicted of (1) operating while intoxicated, a misdemeanor, in violation of MCL 257.6251(A), in City of Bloomfield Hills v Craig Leroy Sigworth, 48th District Court Case No. 19-BH-01322OD and (2) of operating while visibly impaired, a misdemeanor, in violation of MCL 257.6252(C), in City of Detroit v Craig Leroy Sigworth, 36 th District Court Case No. Z793550, as set forth in the Administrator’s Notice of Filing of a Judgment of Conviction filed on August 6, 2020. Additionally, the stipulation contains respondent’s admission that he failed to provide notice of these convictions to the Attorney Grievance Commission and Attorney Discipline Board, as alleged in the formal complaint combined with the judgment of conviction and filed the same date.
Based upon respondent’s admissions and the stipulation of the parties, the panel found that respondent engaged in conduct that was contrary to justice, ethics, honesty, or good morals, in violation of MCR 9.104(3); engaged in conduct that violated a criminal law of a state or of the United States, an ordinance, or tribal law pursuant to MCR 2.615, in violation of MCR 9.104(5) and MRPC 8.4(b); and failed to provide notice of his convictions, in violation of MCR 9.120(A) and (B).
In accordance with the stipulation of the parties, the hearing panel ordered that respondent be reprimanded and subject to conditions relevant to the established misconduct. Costs were assessed in the amount of $757.62.
/s/ Mark A. Armitage Executive Director