MEMBERS LORI McALLlSTER
CHAIRPERSON WILLIAM J. DANHOF VICE-CHAIRPERSON WILLIAM L. MIlHEWS, CPA
SECRRARY GEORGE H. LENNON BILLY BEN BAUMANN, M.D. HON. RICHARD F. SUHRHEINRICH
ANDREA L. SOIAK
STATE OF MICHIGAN
JOHN F. VAN BOLT EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR MARK A. *MITAGE DEPUTY DIRECTOR --* JENNIFER M. PEllY LEGAL A S S I S T M
2 1 1 WEST FORT ST. SUITE 14'10 DETROIT. MICHIGAN 48226- PHONE: 31 3-963-5553 FAX: 31 3-963-5571
TtlOMAS G. KlENBAUM EILEEN MPPlN WEISER
FINAL NOTICE OF SUSPENSION WITH CONDITIONS
Case No. 04-120-GA Notice Issued: November 5,2007 Noel L. Lippman, P 16719, Almont, Michigan, by the Attorney Discipline Board, increasing the suspension ordered by Tri-County hearing Panel # I0 3 from 90 days to 1 year.
I Suspension - 1 Year 2. Effective April 25, 2007 Tri-County Hearing Panel #I03 adopted the findings of the Master that respondent committed professional misconduct, specifically, that respondent made a deliberate misrepresentation to the Court of Appeals; undertook representation in a matter he was not competent to handle; failed to associate with an attorney to fill the gap in his own expertise; and knowingly filed a false response to the request for investigation served upon him by the Grievance Administrator. Respondent was also found to have neglected a divorce matter and an immigration matter. The panel found that respondent's conduct was in violation of MCR 9.104(A)(6); MCR 9. I1 3(A); and Michigan Rules of Professional Conduct I. I(a ) and (c); I.3 ; 1.4(a) and (b); I.1 6(d); 3.2; 3.3(a)(1); 3.3(a); and 8.4(b).
Following further proceedings to determine discipline, the panel ordered that respondent be suspended from the practice of law for 90 days commencing April 25, 2007 and that he be subject to certain conditions relevant to the established misconduct.
The Grievance Administrator filed a petition for review seeking increased discipline. The Attorney Discipline Board conducted review proceedings in accordance with MCR 9.1 18 and entered an order on September 28,2007 increasing discipline to a suspension of one year. The conditions ordered by the hearing panel, including requirements for malpractice insurance, continuing legal education and engagement of a practice monitor in the areas of office and case management were affirmed by the Board. Costs were assessed in the total amount of $9,951 .lo.
Dated: