Notices

Decision Information

Decision Content

MEMBERS WILLIAM J. DANHOF

CHAIRPERSON THOMAS G. KIENBAUM VICE-CHAIRPERSON WILLIAM L. MATTHEWS, CPA - SECRETARY 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 MICHIGAN 48226-3236 PH6NE: 313-963-5553 FAX: 313-963-5571

WWW.ADBMICH.ORG

FINAL NOTICE OF SUSPENSION Case No. 06-137-GA Notice Issued: November 3, 2008

J. Terence O'Donnell, P 31181 , Bloomfield Hills, Michigan, by the Attorney Discipline Board, increasing Tri-County Hearing Panel #54's order of suspension from 180 days to three years.

1. Suspension - 3 Years 2. 'Effective April 2, 2008 1 The hearing panel found that respondent neglected a client's legal matter; exhibited a lack of diligence; failed to notify and promptly deliver funds to a third person; failed to obey a lawful

demand ofa disciplinary authority; submitted a false answer to the Attorney Grievance Commission; failed to provide a trust accounting; and engaged in dishonest and deceitful conduct, in violation of MCl 700.7103(3); MCR 9.104(A)(1), (3) and (7); MCR 9.113(A); and Michigan Rules of Professional Conduct 1.1 (c); 1.15(b); 1.3; 8.1 (a)(1); and 8.4(a)-(c). The hearing panel ordered that respondent's license be suspended for 180 days.

Both the Grievance Administrator and respondent filed petitions for review. Upon review, the Attorney Discipline Board increased the discipline from a 180 day suspension to a three year suspension. The Board also affirmed the hearing panel's denial of respondent's motion for sanctions. Total costs were assessed in the amount of $4,860.28.

Dated: NOV

3 2008~

1 Respondent has been continuously suspended from the practice of law in Michigan since April 2, 2008. Please see Notice of Suspension (Pending Appeal) issued April 4, 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.