MEMBERS MICHAEL B. RIZIK, JR. CHAIRPERSON LINDA S. HOTCHKISS, MD VICE-CHAIRPERSON REV. DR. LOUIS J. PRUES SECRETARY KAREN D. O’DONOGHUE MICHAEL S. HOHAUSER
PETER A. SMIT ALAN GERSHEL LINDA M. ORLANS JASON M. TURKISH
STATE OF MICHIGAN ATTORNEY DISCIPLINE BOARD
333 WEST FORT STREET, SUITE 1700
MARK A. ARMITAGE 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 RECEPTIONIST/SECRETARY —
DETROIT, MICHIGAN 48226-3147
PHONE: 313-963-5553
www.adbmich.org
NOTICE OF REPRIMAND AND RESTITUTION (By Consent)
Case No. 21-67-GA Notice Issued: January 31, 2022 Phillip D. Comorski, P 46413, Detroit, Michigan, by the Attorney Discipline Board Tri-County Hearing Panel #3
Reprimand, Effective January 29, 2022 Respondent and the Grievance Administrator filed a Stipulation for Consent Order of Discipline, pursuant to MCR 9.115(F)(5), that was approved by the Attorney Grievance Commission and accepted by the hearing panel. Based upon respondent’s admissions as set forth in the parties’ stipulation, the panel found that respondent committed professional misconduct in connection with his representation of a client in post-conviction proceedings relating to filing a motion for relief from judgment and a potential habeas corpus petition. Further, the panel found that respondent made misrepresentations to the Grievance Administrator during the investigation of a request for investigation filed against respondent by the client.
Specifically, and in accordance with the parties’ stipulation, the panel found that respondent failed to competently represent his client, in violation of MRPC 1.1(a); neglected a matter entrusted to him, in violation of MRPC 1.1(c); failed to seek the lawful objectives of the client, in violation of MRPC 1.2(a); failed to act with diligence and promptness in representing a client, in violation of MRPC 1.3; failed to keep his client reasonably informed about the status of a matter and to promptly comply with reasonable requests for information, in violation of MRPC 1.4(a); and, failed to explain a matter to the extent reasonably necessary to permit his client to make informed decisions regarding the representation, in violation of MRPC 1.4(b); in connection with a disciplinary matter, knowingly made a false statement of material fact, in violation of MRPC 8.1(a)(1); and engaged in conduct involving dishonesty, fraud, deceit, misrepresentation, where such conduct reflects adversely on the lawyer’s honesty, trustworthiness, or fitness as a lawyer, in violation of MRPC 8.4(b); and made a knowing misrepresentation of fact or circumstances surrounding a request for investigation, in violation of MCR 9.104(6). Respondent was also found to have violated MCR 9.104(1)-(3).
In accordance with the stipulation of the parties, the hearing panel ordered that respondent be reprimanded and that he pay restitution totaling $8,100. Costs were assessed in the amount of $778.96.