Notices

Decision Information

Decision Content

MEMBERS MARTIN M. DOCTOROFF CHAIRMAN

OBERT S. HARRISON 1, ICE CHAIRMAN 4 'ARLES C. VINCENT. M.D. SECRETARY

REMONA A. GREEN HANLEY M. GURWIN PATRICK J. KEATING ODESSA KOMER

STATE OF MICHIGAN

JOHN F. VAN BOLT EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR 8

GENERAL COUNSEL -

SUITE 1260 333 W. FORT STREET DETROIT. MICHIGAN 48226

Area Code 313 963-5553

NOTICE OF REPRIMAND F i l e No. DP 10185 Thomas Rosender, P 19641, 3505 E l i zabe th Lake Road, Pon t i ac , M I 48054, b y Attorney Di sc ip l ine Board Oakland County Hearing Panel # 7.

,

1) Reprimand; 2 ) E f f e c t i v e June 8, 1987. The Hearing Panel considered a four Count Complaint f i l e d b y the Grievance Adminis b a t o r a l l e g i n g p ro fe s s iona l misconduct b y the respondent i n the handling of a c o l l e c t i o n matter. The Panel sus t a ined the charges i n Count I the reo f , to w i t : Tha t upon r e c e i p t of funds on b e h a l f of h i s c l i e n t , Respondent f a i l e d t o d e p o s i t those funds i n a n i d e n t i f i a b l e bank account s e p a r a t e from h i s own funds and commingled the funds belonging t o h i s c l i e n t w i t h h i s own i n v i o l a t i o n of Canon 9 o f t h e Code o f P ro fe s s iona l Respons ib i l i t y , DR 9-102 ( A ) . I n mi t iga t ion , t he H e a r i n g P a n e l n o t e d t h a t i t b e l i e v e d t h a t a t a b o u t t h e t i m e Respondent began t o r e c e i v e payments on the account , he purchased a bank c e r t i f i c a t e of depos i t , capt ioned a s a n Escrow Account, w i t h the i n t e n t i o n of covering the amounts he a n t i c i p a t e d c o l l e c t i n g . However, the Panel found t h a t , o t h e r than by the Respondent, i t could no t b e determined t h a t t h a t c e r t i f i c a t e had some r e l a t i o n t o t h e c o l l e c t i o n o f t h e a c c o u n t . The P a n e l concluded Respondent's a c t i o n s were n e g l i g e n t r a t h e r than i n t e n t i o n a l and t h a t a l l o the r charges of misconduct s e t f o r t h i n the Complaint had n o t been e s t ab l i shed . Cos ts s e r e assessed i n t h e F p t of $250.47.

Da ed:

ra8W

 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.