Notices

Decision Information

Decision Content

MEMBERS JONATHAN E. LAUDERBACH CHAIRPERSON MICHAEL B. RIZIK, JR.

VICE-CHAIRPERSON BARBARA WILLIAMS FORNEY

SECRETARY JAMES A. FINK JOHN W. INHULSEN

KAREN D. O'DONOGHUE LINDA S. HOTCHKISS, MD

ANNA FRUSHOUR MICHAEL S. HOHAUSER

STATE OF MICIDGAN ATTORNEY DISCIPLINE BOARD

333 WEST FORT STREET, SUITE 1700

DETROIT, MICHIGAN 48226-3147 PHONE: 313-963-5553 I FAX: 313-963-5571

MARK A. ARMITAGE EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR

WENDY A. NEELEY DEPUTY DIRECTOR

KAREN M. DALEY ASSOCIA TE COUNSEL

SHERRY MIFSUD OFFICE ADMINISTRATOR

ALLY SON M. PLOURDE CASE MANAGER

OWEN R. MONTGOMERY CASE MANAGER

JULIE M. LOISELLE RECEPTIONISTISECRETARY

www.adbmich.org

NOTICE OF REPRIMAND WITH CONDITIONS (By Consent)

Case No. 19-46-JC

Notice Issued: October 31, 2019

Joshua J. Kuiper, P 66576, Grand Rapids, Michigan, by the Attorney Discipline Board Kent County Hearing Panel #4.

Reprimand, Effective October 25, 2019

The respondent and the Grievance Administrator filed a Stipulation for Consent Order of Reprimand With Conditions, in accordance with MCR 9.115(F)(5), which was approved by the Attorney Grievance Commission and accepted by the hearing panel. The stipulation contained respondent's admission that he was convicted in a matter titled People of the State of Michigan v Joshua James Kuiper, 17th Circuit Court Case No. 17- 02059-FH of the misdemeanor offense of reckless driving, in violation of MCl 257.626.

Based on respondent's conviction, admissions and the parties' stipulation, the panel finds that respondent committed professional misconduct when he engaged in conduct that violated a criminal law of a state or of the United States, an ordinance, or tribal law pursuant to MCR 2.615, in violation of MCR 9.104(5).

In accordance with the stipulation of the parties, the hearing panel ordered that respondent be reprimanded and that he be subject to conditions relevant to the established misconduct. Costs were assessed in the amount of $791.13.

#14a Mark A. Armitage Executive Director

.

 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.