NOTICE OF REVOCATION Case No. 03-144-GA Notice Issued: March 15, 2004 Katherine M. Williams, P 52769, Detroit, Michigan, by the Attorney Discipline Board Tri-County Hearing Panel #16.
1. Revocation 2. Effective March 13, 2004 1 Based on respondent=s default for failure to file an answer to the formal complaint and failure to appear at the public hearings, the hearing panel found that respondent, in a divorce matter, failed to keep her client reasonably informed regarding the status of her matter and failed to respond to her client=s request for more information. In a civil litigation matter, respondent failed to forward the transfer of venue fee to the court; failed to take further action after the motion for change of venue was granted; and misrepresented to the client that settlement had been reached. In an insurance dispute, respondent failed to forward requested documents to the insurance company which resulted in denial of her client=s claim; and abandoned the representation. In a landlord/tenant matter, respondent failed to take any further action after the parties had entered into a consent judgment; misrepresented to the client that she would take care of a second complaint and default judgment; and abandoned the representation. In a fair debt collection matter, respondent abandoned the representation after filing a complaint with the U.S. District Court. In a second insurance dispute, respondent failed to take any action on her client=s behalf; misrepresented that she had filed a claim and that a settlement was close; and abandoned the representation. In a third insurance dispute, respondent failed to comply with a court order; failed to advise her client that she had not complied and that the case had been dismissed; and misrepresented to her client that a settlement was reached and that the settlement funds would be issued. Finally, respondent failed to file answers to six requests for investigation served upon her by the Grievance Administrator.
Respondent=s conduct was in violation MCR 9.104(A)(1)-(4) and (7); MCR 9.113(A) and (B)(2); and Michigan Rules of Professional Conduct 1.1(c); 1.2(a); 1.3; 1.4(a) and (b); 3.2; 8.1(a)(2); and 8.4(a)-(c). The hearing panel ordered that respondent=s license to practice law in Michigan be revoked and assessed costs in the amount of $1,832.42.
1 Respondent=s license to practice law in Michigan has been revoked since January 9, 2004. See Notice of Revocation, dated January 14, 2004.