NOTICE OF SUSPENSION AND RESTITUTION Case Nos. 00-46-GA; 00-75-FA; 00-89-GA Issued: November 9, 2000 Karen R. Hammond a/k/a Karen R. Hammond-Nash, P-40878, South Bend, Indiana, by the Attorney Discipline Board Kalamazoo County Hearing Panel #1.
1.
2.
Suspension - 179 days.
Effective November 9, 2000.
With regard to Formal Complaints 00-46-GA and 00-75-FA, the hearing panel found, by default, that respondent had committed professional misconduct, specifically: In a civil matter, respondent failed to file an appearance resulting in a default being entered against her client; failed to file a motion to set aside that default; failed to protect her client=s interests; failed to respond to her client=s numerous inquiries regarding the status of her matter; abandoned her client=s representation; and failed to promptly refund unearned fees. In a criminal matter, respondent failed to comply with the prosecution=s discovery demand; and caused the court to declare a mistrial due to respondent=s representation after the jury trial had commenced. Respondent also failed to file an answer to the request for investigation or the formal complaint served by the Grievance Administrator. Respondent=s conduct was in violation of MCR 9.103(C); MCR 9.104(1)-(4) and (7); MCR 9.113(A); MCR 9.113(B)(2); and Michigan Rules of Professional Conduct 1.1(a)-(c); 1.2(a); 1.3; 1.4(a); 1.5(a); 1.16(d); 3.2; 8.1(b); and 8.4(a) and (c).
With regard to Formal Complaint 00-89-GA, the panel found, unanimously, that respondent had committed professional misconduct, to wit: In an annulment proceeding, respondent failed to file for annulment on behalf of her client; hired a private investigator, without authorization, to verify the address of her client=s husband despite having been given the current address of the husband; failed to respond to her client=s inquiries as to the status of her matter; abandoned her client=s representation; failed to promptly refund unearned fees; and failed to answer the request for investigation served by the Grievance Administrator. Respondent=s conduct was in violation of MCR 9.103(C); MCR 9.104(1)-(4) and (7); MCR 9.113(A); MCR 9.113(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); 8.1(b); and 8.4(a) and (c).
The hearing panel ordered that respondent=s license be suspended for 179 days and that she pay restitution in the aggregate amount of $750.00. Costs were assessed in the amount of $881.37.