Notices

Decision Information

Decision Content

MEMBERS REV. MICHAEL MURRAY CHAIRPERSON JONATHAN E. LAUDERBACH

VICE·CHAIRPERSON BARBARA WILLIAMS FORNEY

SECRETARY JAMES A. FINK JOHN W. INHULSEN KAREN D. O'DONOGHUE MICHAEL B. RIZIK, JR.

LINDA S. HOTCHKISS, MD ANNA FRUSHOUR

STATE OF MICHIGAN ATTORNEY DISCIPLINE BOARD

333 WEST FORT STREET, SUITE 1700

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

MARK A. ARMITAGE EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR

WENDY A. NEELEY DEPUTY DIRECTOR

KAREN M. DALEY ASSOCIATE COUNSEL

SHERRY L. MIFSUD OFFICE ADMIN/STRA TOR

ALLYSON M. PLOURDE CASE MANAGER

OWEN R. MONTGOMERY CASE MANAGER

JULIE M. LOISELLE RECEPTION/STISECRETARY

www.adbmich.org

NOTICE OF REPRIMAND (By Consent)

Case No. 19-13-GA

Notice Issued: June 7, 2019

Rebecca H. Filiatraut, P 46443, Southfield, Michigan, by the Attorney Discipline Board Tri­ County Hearing Panel #72.

Reprimand, Effective June 4, 2019.

The 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 she committed acts of professional misconduct when she unlawfully attempted to obstruct another party's access to evidence during the discovery period in the matter titled Tera Pearsall v Arnulfo Camcho, et a/., Monroe County Circuit Court, Case No. 17­ 139771-NI.

Based upon respondent's admissions and the stipulation of the parties, the panel found that respondent counseled or assisted another person to unlawfully obstruct another party's access to evidence; and/or unlawfully alter, destroy, or conceal a document or other material having potential evidentiary value, in violation of MRPC 3.4{a); failed to make reasonably diligent efforts to comply with a legally proper discovery request by an opposing party, in violation of MRPC 3.4(d); and knowingly assisted or induced another to violate or attempt to violate the Rules of Professional Conduct, in violation of MRPC 8.4(a). Respondent was also found to have violated MRPC 8.4{c) and MCR 9.104(1)-{3).

In accordance with the stipulation of the parties, the panel ordered that respondent be reprimanded. Costs were assessed in the amount of $757.75.

a Mark A. Armitage Executive Director

 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.