Notices

Decision Information

Decision Content

MEMBERS WILLIAM J. DANHOF

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

SECRETARY GEORGE H. LENNON BILLY BEN BAUMANN, M.D. ANDREA L SOLAK ROSALIND E. GRIFFIN, M.D. CARL E. VER BEEK CRAIG H. LUBBEN

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 A MICHIGAN 48226-3236 PHuNE: 313-963-5553 FAX: 313-963-5571 WWW.ADBMICH.ORG

NOTICE OF SUSPENSION WITH CONDITIONS Case No. 07-147-GA Notice Issued: October 9, 2008

Kevin M. Shepherd, P 47303, Chesterfield, Michigan by the Attorney Discipline Board Tri-County Panel #103.

1. Suspension - 1 Year 2. Effective September 17,2008 The respondent appeared at the hearing but 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 legal matters; failed to act with reasonable diligence and promptness in representing his clients; failed to keep his clients reasonably informed about the status of their cases; and failed to explain· the matters to his clients to the extent necessary to permit his clients to make informed decisions regarding their representation. In two of those matters, respondent was found to have failed to take reasonable steps to surrender papers and property to which his clients were entitled. Finally, respondent was also found to have knowingly made a false statement of material fact or law regarding the status of his client's case.

Respondent's conduct was in violation of MCR 9.1 04(A)(1 )-(4); and Michigan Rules of Professional Conduct 1.1 (c); 1.3; 1.4(a) and (b); 1.16(d); 4.1; and 8.4(a)-(c).

The panel ordered that respondent's license to practice law in Michigan be suspended for one year and that he be subject to conditions relevant to the established misconduct. Costs were assessed in the amount of $2,201.28.

'C~~"Dated:'

-OCT &2008 -------

 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.