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 SUSPENSION WITH CONDITION (By Consent)
Case No. 21-78-GA Notice Issued: January 11, 2022 Christa Rosella Minnick, P 72689, Novi, Michigan, by the Attorney Discipline Board Tri-County Hearing Panel #69.
Suspension - Three Years, Effective January 11, 2022 The respondent and the Grievance Administrator filed a Stipulation for Consent Order of a Three Year Suspension With Conditions, in accordance with MCR 9.115(F)(5), which 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 while employed as an associate attorney at a law firm that handles immigration matters and when she failed to answer a request for investigation.
Based on respondent’s admissions and the stipulation of the parties, the panel found that, with regard to Counts One through Six, respondent failed to provide competent representation to her clients, in violation of MRPC 1.1(c); failed to seek the lawful objectives of her clients, in violation of MRPC 1.2(a); failed to act with reasonable diligence and promptness in representing her clients in violation of MRPC 1.3; failed to keep her clients reasonably informed about the status of their matters, in violation of MRPC 1.4(a); failed to explain a matter to the extent reasonably necessary for a client to make informed decisions regarding the representation, in violation of MRPC 1.4(b); knowingly made a false statement of material fact, in violation of MRPC 4.1 and 8.4(b) (Count One only); engaged in conduct that violated or attempted to violate the standards and/or rules of professional conduct adopted by the Michigan Supreme Court, in violation of MRPC 8.4(a) and MCR 9.104(4); engaged in conduct that involved dishonesty, fraud, deceit, or misrepresentation, where such conduct reflected adversely on the lawyer's honesty, trustworthiness, or fitness as a lawyer, in violation of MRPC 8.4(b); engaged in conduct that was prejudicial to the proper administration of justice, in violation of MCR 9.104(1); engaged in conduct that exposed the legal profession or the courts to obloquy, contempt, censure, or reproach, in violation of MCR 9.104(2); and engaged in conduct that was contrary to justice, ethics, honesty, or good morals, in violation of MCR 9.104(3).
With regard to Count Seven, the panel found that respondent knowingly failed to timely answer a request for investigation, in violation of MCR 9.104(7), MCR 9.113(A), and MCR 9.113(B)(2); knowingly failed to respond to a lawful demand for information, in violation of MRPC 8.1(a)(2); engaged in conduct that was prejudicial to the administration of justice, in violation of MRPC 8.4(c) and MCR 9.104(1); and engaged in conduct that violated or attempted to violate the standards and/or rules of professional conduct adopted by the Michigan Supreme Court, in violation of MRPC 8.4(a) and MCR 9.104(4).
In accordance with the parties’ stipulation, the panel ordered that respondent’s license to practice law be suspended for a period of three years and that she be subject to a condition relevant to the established misconduct. Total costs were assessed in the amount of $764.40.