Notices

Decision Information

Decision Content

MEMBERS WILLIAM J. DANHOF

CHAIRPERSON THOMAS G. KIENBAUM VICE-CHAIRPERSON WILLIAM L. MATTHEWS, CPA

SECRETARY ANDREA L. SOLAK ROSALJND 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. PETTY LEGAL ASSISTANT

211 WEST FORT ST. SUITE 1410 DETROIT MICHIGAN 48226-3236 PH6 NE: 313-963-5553 FAX: 313-963-5571 WWW.ADBMICH.ORG

NOTICE OF REVOCATION AND RESTITUTION Case No. 09-68-GA Notice Issued: December 17,2009

Timothy Kovach, P 39595, Ann Arbor, Michigan, by the Attorney Discipline Board Washtenaw County Hearing Panel #1.

1. Revocation 2. Effective December 16, 2009 The respondent did not appear at the hearing and was found to be in default for his failure to file an answer to the formal complaint. Based on that default, the panel found that respondent neglected three client matters; failed to act with reasonable diligence and promptness on behalf of his clients; failed to keep his client informed, and failed to comply promptly with his clients' requests for information; failed to promptly payor deliver funds to which a client or third person was entitled; failed to hold the property of two clients separate from his own property; failed to refund unearned fees to two clients; knowingly failed to respond to a lawful demand for information by a disciplinary authority; and failed to answer three requests for investigation.

Respondent's conduct was in violation of MCR 9.1 04(A)(2)-(4) and (7); MCR 9.113; MCR 9.115(0); and Michigan Rules of Professional Conduct 1.1(c); 1.3; 1.4(a); 1.15(b)(3); 1.15(d); 1.16(d); 8.1(a)(2); and 8.4(a) and (b).

The hearing panel ordered that respondent's license to practice law in Michigan be revoked and that he pay restitution in the aggregate amount of $40,690.00. Costs were assessed in the amount of $2,179.56.

Dated:O

EC. 17-.

 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.