Notices

Decision Information

Decision Content

NOTICE OF SUSPENSION AND RESTITUTION Case No. 97-278-GA June A. Porter, P-30589, Detroit, Michigan, by Attorney Discipline Board Tri-County Hearing Panel #16.

1) Suspension - Three (3) Years; 2) Effective April 17, 1998. The first complainant paid respondent $500 to represent her in post-judgment divorce proceedings. The panel found, by default, that respondent neglected the matter; failed to refund the unearned fee; and failed to answer the Request for Investigation.

The second complainant paid respondent $750 to represent her incarcerated brother in a paternity action. The panel found that respondent neglected the matter; failed to refund the unearned fee; and failed to answer the Request for Investigation.

The third complainants retained respondent to represent them in a bankruptcy matter. The panel found that respondent neglected the matter; filed bankruptcy schedules which were false, incomplete and misleading; failed to comply with two court orders sanctioning her; failed to release the client file upon her termination; and failed to respond to successor counsel's motion for turnover of property, appear at the hearing on that motion, or release the client file, despite being ordered to do so by the court. Respondent also failed to answer the Request for Investigation; failed to answer the Formal Complaint; and failed to appear at one of the disciplinary hearings.

Respondent's conduct was found to be in violation of MCR 9.103(C); MCR 9.104(1)-(4) and (7); MCR 9.113(A) and (B)(2); and Michigan Rules of Professional Conduct 1.1(a)-(c); 1.2(a); 1.3; 1.4; 1.5(a); 1.16(d); 3.2; 3.3(a)(1)-(3); 3.4(c); 8.1(b); and 8.4(a)-(c).

The panel ordered that respondent be suspended from the practice of law for three years, and make restitution to two complainants in the total amount of $1,250. Costs were assessed in the amount of $555.24.

Respondent filed a petition for review and stay of discipline. The petition for stay was denied. On May 29, 1998, the Attorney Discipline Board entered an order dismissing the petition for review for respondent's failure to file the required brief.

 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.