Notices

Decision Information

Decision Content

MEMBERS WILLIAM P. HAMPTON

CHAIRPERSON LORI McALLISTER VICE-CHAJRPERSON WILLIAM L. MATIHEWS, CPA SECRETARY REV. IRA COMBS, JR. GEORGE H. LENNON BILLY BEN BAUMANN, M.D.

HON. RICHARD F. SUHRHEINRICH WILLIAM J. DANHOF ANDREA L. SOLAK

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 PHONE: 313-963-5553

FAX: 313-963-5571 WWW.ADBMICH.ORG

NOTICE OF REVOCATION Case No. 05-151-GA Notice Issued: September 21, 2007 Rodney Watts, P 26832, Southfield, Michigan, by the Attorney Discipline Board, vacating Tri-County Hearing Panel #64's order of a one year suspension and increasing discipline to a revocation.

1. Revocation 2. February 16, 2007 1 The hearing panel found that respondent had knowingly misappropriated funds belonging to a third party; knowingly made false statements of material fact to the Court and to another attorney; and that he failed to answer a request for investigation. Respondent's conduct was in violation of MCR 9.104(A)(1)-(4) and (7); MCR 9.113(A) and (B)(2); and Michigan Rules of Professional Conduct 1.15(a)-(c); 4.1; 8.1 (a)(2); and 8.4(a)-(c). The hearing panel ordered that respondent's license to practice law be suspended for one year.

The Grievance Administrator filed a timely petition for review on February 15, 2007 and respondent filed a cross-petition on March 15, 2007. On April 30, respondent's cross-petition for review was dismissed by the Board for his failure to file a brief in support of his cross-petition.

Upon review, the Board vacated the hearing panel's order of a one year suspension and increased discipline to a revocation of respondent's license to practice law in Michigan, retroactive to February 16, 2007. Total costs were assessed in the amount of $2,302.58.

Dated:

SEP 212_

_

1 Respondent has been continuously suspended since April 30, 2005. See Notice of Suspension and Probation with Conditions, issued March 15, 2005

 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.