Notices

Decision Information

Decision Content

MEMBERS LOUANN VAN DER WIELE CHAIRPERSON REV. MICHAEL MURRAY

VICE-CHAIRPERSON BARBARA WILLIAMS FORNEY SECRETARY JAMES A. FINK JOHN W. INHULSEN

JONATHAN E. LAUDERBACH KAREN D. O'DONOGHUE MICHAEL B. RIZIK, JR. LINDA S. HOTCHKISS, MD

STATE OF MICHIGAN ATTORNEY DISCIPLINE BOARD

211 WEST FORT STREET, SUITE 1410

DETROIT, MICHIGAN 48226-3236 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 ADMINISTRA TOR

ALLYSON M. PLOURDE CASE MANAGER

OWEN R. MONTGOMERY CASE MANAGER

JULIE M. LOISELLE RECEPTIONISTISECRETARY

www.adbmich.org

NOTICE OF REPRIMAND (By Consent)

Case No. 18-32-GA Notice Issued: September 21,2018 Deborah A. Bonner, P 48031, Detroit, Michigan, by the Attorney Discipline Board Tri-County Hearing Panel #3.

Reprimand, Effective September 19,2018. 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 as the result of her improper use of an IOLT A account by making deposits of personal funds from outside personal or business accounts from August 1, 2016, through March 9, 2017.

Based upon respondent's admissions, pleas of no contest, and the stipulation of the parties, the panel found that respondent held funds other than client or third person funds in an IOL TA, in violation of MRPC 1.15(a)(3); and deposited her own funds in an IOLTA in excess of the amount reasonably necessary to pay financial institution service charges or fees, or to obtain a waiver of service charges or fees, in violation of MRPC 1.15(f). Respondent was also found to have violated MCR 9.104(4) and MRPC 8.4(a).

In accordance with the stipulation of the parties, the panel ordered that respondent be reprimanded. Costs were assessed in the amount of $757.09.

~()~ 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.