Notices

Decision Information

Decision Content

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 (By Consent)

Case No. 20-75-GA Notice Issued: February 9, 2021 Harrell D. Milhouse, P 43392, Flint, Michigan, by the Attorney Discipline Board Genesee County Hearing Panel #3.

Reprimand, Effective February 2, 2021 Respondent and the 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. Based upon respondent’s admissions and the stipulation of the parties, the panel found that respondent committed professional misconduct by abandoning his representation of a client in a potential action arising from the purchase of a vehicle.

Specifically, the panel found that respondent neglected a legal matter entrusted to him, in violation of MRPC 1.1(c); failed to act with reasonable diligence and promptness in representing a client, in violation of MRPC 1.3; failed to keep a client reasonably informed about the status of a matter and comply promptly with reasonable requests for information, in violation of MRPC 1.4(a); failed to explain a matter to the extent reasonably necessary to permit a client to make informed decisions regarding the representation, in violation of MRPC 1.4(b); and, failed to take reasonable steps to protect a client’s interests upon termination of representation, in violation of MRPC 1.16(d). Respondent was also found to have violated MCR 9.104(2)-(4) and MRPC 8.4(a).

In accordance with the stipulation of the parties, the hearing panel ordered that respondent be reprimanded. Costs were assessed in the amount of $765.00.

/s/ Mark A. Armitage Executive Director

 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.