MEMBERS LOUANN VAN DERWIELE 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 ADMINISTRATOR
ALLYSON M. PLOURDE CASE MANAGER
OWEN R. MONTGOMERY CASE MANAGER
JULIE M. LOISELLE RECEPTIONISTISECRETARY
NOTICE OF REPRIMAND AND RESTITUTION WITH CONDITION (By Consent)
Case No. 17-108-GA Notice Issued: July 5, 2018 Peter A. D'Angelo, P 69487, Portage, Michigan, by the Attorney Discipline Board Kalamazoo County Hearing Panel #3.
Reprimand, Effective July 4, 2018. 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 he committed acts of professional misconduct by neglecting a client's adoption matter, and by neglecting a separate client's divorce proceeding.
Based upon respondent's admissions and the stipulation of the parties, the panel found that respondent neglected a legal matter entrusted to him, in violation of MRPC 1.1 (c); failed to seek the lawful objectives of his client through reasonably available means permitted by law, in violation of MRPC 1.2(a); failed to act with reasonable diligence and promptness in representing his client, in violation of MRPC 1.3; failed to keep his client informed of the status the matter and comply promptly with reasonable requests for information, in violation of MRPC 1.4(a); and failed to refund the unearned portion of an advance fee, in violation of MRPC 1.16(d). Respondent was also found to have violated MCR 9.104(1)-(3).
In accordance with the stipulation of the parties, the panel ordered that respondent be reprimanded with a condition relevant to the established misconduct. Respondent was also ordered to pay restitution. Costs were assessed in the amount of $779.59.
Ma~. Mark A. Armitage .. '
Executive Director