aOBEF,T S. HARRISON 'ICE CHAIRMAN
tARLES C. VINCENT. M.O.
SECRETARY REMONA A. GREEN HANLM M. GURWlN PATRICK J. KEAflNG OOESSA KOMER
STATE OF MICHIGAN
JOHN F VAN BOLT a x u r n ~ E C T O I 6I GENERAL COUNSEL
- SUITE It60 3x3 w FORT SrE-Ei
ETUOIT. MlCHlGW 48Z4 &HC cos 313 963.5653
NOTICE OF SUSPENSION F i l e No. DP 134/a5 Alvin 0. Brazze l l , P 23599, 2012 Kennedy Square Building, D e t r o i t , M I 48226 by A t t o r n e y D i s c i p l i n e Board Wayne County Hearing Panel 16,
1 ) Suspension - 180 days; 2) E f fec t ive February 4, 1987. The Hearing Panel found t h a t Respondent's a c t s and omissions a r i s i n g from h i s r ep resen ta t ion of a c l i e n t c o n s t i t u t e d p ro fes s iona l misconduct a s follows:
Count I -respondent f i l e d s u i t on behalf of a c l i e n t i n the year 1980 bu t f a i l e d to perform any se rv ices i n t h a t ca se a f t e r 1981 and f a i l e d to withdraw a s c o u n s e l of record i n v i o l a t i o n of MCR 9.104(1,2 64) and the Code of P ro fes s iona l Respons ib i l i t y , DR 1 102(A)(5,6); DR 6 - 1 0 1 ( ~ ) ( 1 , 3 ) and DR 7-101(A)(1-3);
C o u n t 11 -* re sponden t f a l s e l y r e p r e s e n t e d t o h i s c l i e n t i n August 1984 t h a t the case was going we l l when, i n f a c t , the case had been dismissed f o r no p r o g r e s s , i n v i o l a t i o n of MCR 9.104(1-4) and DR 1-102(h)(4-6);
C o u n t I V - - r e sponden t c o n t i n u e d t o r e p r e s e n t h i s c l i e n t a l t h o u g h h i s l i c e n s e was suspended f o r a p e r i o d o f s i x t y days and he f a i l e d t o n o t i f y h i s c l i e n t o f h i s change of s t a t u s c o n t r a r y t o MCB 9.104(1,3, 6 4 ) and DR 1-102(A)(5-6);
Count V -respondent f i l e d a f a l s e Af f idav i t with the c l e r k of the Supreme Court wi th regard to h i s no t i f i e a t i o n to c l i e n t s of h i s change of s t d t u s , i n v i o l a t i o n of HCR 9.104(1,4) and OR 1-102(h)(5,6);
Count V I -respondent 's r ep ly to a Request I n v e s t i g a t i o n contained misrepresenta t ions v i o l a t i o n of MCR 9.104(1,4) and DR 1-102(A)(5,6).
f o r i n
Following a sepa ra t e hearing to cons ider aggrava r ing and mi t iga t ing c i r c u s t ances bearing upon the l e v e l of d i s c i p l i n e to be imposed, the Hearing Panel concluded that suspension of 180 days was warranted . . C o s t s were a s s e s s e d i n t h e amount of $1255.52.
S e p a r a t e P e t i t i o n s f o r Review have been f i l e d by t he Respondent and the Grievance Administrator seeking modif ica cion of the l e v e l of d i s c i p i i n e . Respondent has no t requastad a sUsy of d i s c i p l i n e and the suspension w i l l remain i n a f f e c t u n t i l f u r t h e r order of the Attorney Di sc ip l ine Board o r u n t i l Respondent's r e i n s ta tenent i n accordance v i th the procedures s e t and HCR 9 .