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.I NHULSEN

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

ANNA FRUSHOUR MICHAEL S. HOHAUSER

STATE OF MlClDGAN ATTORNEY DISCIPLINE BOARD

333 WEST FORT STREET, SUITE 1700

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

MARK A.A RMITAGE EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR

WENDY A. NEELEY DEPUTY DIRECTOR

KAREN M. DALEY ASSOCIATE COUNSEL

SHERRY MIFSUD OFFICE ADMINISTRATOR

ALLYSON M. PLOURDE CASE MANAGER

OWEN R. MONTGOMERY CASE MANAGER

JULIE M. LOISELLE RECEPTIONISTISECRETARY

www.adbmich.org

NOTICE OF REPRIMAND (By Consent)

Case No. 19-29-GA

Notice Issued: October 9, 2019

Lee B. Steinberg, P 20955, Southfield, Michigan, by the Attorney Discipline Board Tri­ County Hearing Panel #61.

Reprimand, Effective October 3, 2019

Respondent and the Grievance Administrator filed a Stipulation for Consent Order of Discipline, 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 admissions to the allegations that he committed acts of professional misconduct by creating a fictitious case name and number to give the appearance that a case was pending so that he could obtain information via a subpoena.

Based on respondent's admissions and the parties' stipulation, the panel finds that respondent asserted an issue that was frivolous and had no basis for doing so, in violation of MRPC 3.1; knowingly made a false statement of material fact or law to a third person, in violation of MRPC 4.1; and used methods of obtaining evidence that violate the legal rights of a third person, in violation of MRPC 4.4. The panel also found that respondent violated MCR 9.104(1)-(4) and MRPC 8.4(a)-(c).

In accordance with the stipulation of the parties, the hearing panel ordered that respondent be reprimanded. Costs were as essed in the amount of $765.20.

 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.