Notices

Decision Information

Decision Content

MEMBERS LORI McALLISTER

CHAIRPERSON WILLIAM J. DANHOF VICE-CHAIRPERSON WILLIAM l. MATIHEWS, CPA

SECRETARY GEORGE H. LENNON BILLY BEN BAUMANN, M.D. HON. RICHARD F. SUHRHEINRICH ANDREA l. SOLAK THOMAS G. KIENBAUM EILEEN LAPPIN WEISER

STATE OF MICHIGAN ATTORNEY DISCIPLINE BOARD

JOHN F. VAN BOlT EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR

MARK A. ARMITAGE DEPUTY DIREGOR JENNIFER M. PETTY LEGAl. ASSISTANT

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

FINAL NOTICE OF SUSPENSION WITH CONDITIONS Case No: 04-21-GA Notice Issued: November 26,2007 Robert E. Butcher, P 11478, Grosse lie, Michigan, by the Attorney Discipline Tri-County Hearing Panel #28.

1. Suspension - 90 Days 2. Effective November 20, 2007 The respondent filed an answer to the formal complaint and appeared at the hearing. The panel found that respondent, in a probate matter, failed to provide notice of a fee agreement to interested persons; paid himself fees from the estate account, contrary to MCR 5.313(E); and mortgaged estate property primarily for the purpose of paying himself, contrary to MCl 700.3715. Respondent's conduct was found to be in violation of MCR 9.104(A)(1), (2), and (4); and Michigan Rules of Professional Conduct 1.5(a); and 8.4(a) and (c).

The hearing panel ordered that respondent's license to practice law in Michigan be suspended for 90 days and that he be subject to certain conditions relevant to the established misconduct.

Respondent and the Grievance Administrator filed petitions for review. Following a review hearing, the Attorney Discipline Board affirmed the hearing panel's order. Respondent then filed a motion for reconsideration, which was denied by the Board.

On October 29, 2007, the Michigan Supreme Court denied respondent's application for leave to appeal and the Attorney Discipline Board issued an order extending respondent's automatic stay of discipline to November 20,2007. Total costs were assessed in the amount of $2,674.62.

Dated: NOV 26.;

 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.