Notices

Decision Information

Decision Content

NOTICE OF REVOCATION WITH CONDITIONS Case Nos. 96-75-GA; 96-149-GA Perry T. Christy, P-11874, Dearborn and Plymouth, Michigan, by the Attorney Discipline Board increasing Tri-County Hearing Panel #22's Order of Suspension for eighteen months.

1) Revocation; 2) Effective Retroactive to July 27, 1996. Respondent was suspended for non-payment of disciplinary costs in Case Nos. 92-191-GA; 92-212-FA, effective February 3, 1995. Respondent was also suspended for one year in Case No. 94- 125-GA, effective July 27, 1995. Respondent has not been reinstated to the practice of law. The panel found that during the period of suspension, respondent accepted the representation of numerous Prudential Legal Care Services Plan members, rendered legal services to them, and billed Prudential $7,091 in attorney fees; despite written and verbal requests by Prudential and subsequent counsel for release of the client files, respondent failed to turn over the files or to cooperate with Prudential; and failed to answer two Requests for Investigation.

Respondent's conduct was found to be in violation of MCR 9.103(C); MCR 9.104(1)-(4), (7) and (9); MCR 9.113(A) and (B)(2); MCR 9.119(E); Michigan Rules of Professional Conduct 1.15(b); 1.16(d); 5.5(a); 8.1(b); and 8.4(a)-(c); and MCL 600.916; MSA 27A.916.

The panel ordered that respondent be suspended from the practice of law for eighteen months commencing July 27, 1996, the expiration date of the one-year suspension imposed in Case No. 94-125-GA, and that he turn over all files pertaining to Prudential clients.

The Grievance Administrator filed a petition for review challenging the sufficiency and retroactivity of the panel's order. In an order and opinion issued October 10, 1997, the Attorney Discipline Board increased discipline to revocation of respondent's license to practice law effective July 27, 1996.

Respondent filed an application for leave to appeal, which was denied by the Michigan Supreme Court in an order entered July 28, 1998.

Costs were assessed in the total amount of $2,002.09.

 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.