Notices

Decision Information

Decision Content

MEMBERS PATRICK J. KEATING CHAIRMAN

MARTIN M. DOCTOROFF VICE CHAIRMAN

:HARLES C. VINCENT, M.D. T,AR , REMONA A. GREEN HANLEY M. GURWIN ROBERT S. HARRISON ODESSA KOMER

STATE OF MICHIGAN

JOHN F. VAN BOLT EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR 6

GENERAL COUNSEL

SUITE 1260 333 W. FORT STREET DETROIT. MICHIGAN 48226

Area Code 313 963-5553

NOTICE OF SUSPENSION (Pending Appeal)

F i l e No. DP 23/86 Char l e s B. Evans, P 13240, 3619 Kip l ing , Berkley, M I 48072 by Attorney Di sc ip l ine Board Oakland County Hearing Panel I l l .

1 ) Suspension - 60 Days;

2) E f f e c t i v e August 28, 1986. The Respondent d id n o t answer the Formal Complaints f i l e d by the Grievance Administrator and d i d n o t appear be fo re the Hearing Panel a t t he scheduled hear ing on June 17 , 1986. By v i r t u e of the Defaul t s which had been f i l e d , the Panel concluded t h a t Respondent f a i l e d t o pay c o s t s a s ordered by a Hearing Pane l i n a p r i o r d i s c i p l i n e proceeding, f a i l e d t o answer a Request f o r I n v e s t i g a t i o n f i l e d by the Grievance Adminis t r a t o r and f a i l e d t o answer a Formal Complaint. Respondent' s conduct was found t o be i n v i o l a t i o n of MCR 9.104(1-4)(7); MCR 9 . 1 1 3 ( ~ ) ( B ) and Canon 1 of the Code of P ro fe s s iona l Respons ib i l i t y , to w i t : DR 1 - 1 0 2 ( ~ ) ( 5 , 6 ) . Costs were a s se s sed i n t he amount of $84.09.

A P e t i t i o n f o r Review h a s been f i l e d by t h e G r i e v a n c e Adminis t ra tor , and the ma t t e r w i l l be considered a t a f u t u r e meeting of the Attorney Di sc ip l ine Board.

NOTE: Respondent has been suspended from the p r a c t i c e of l a w cont inuously s i n c e November 12, 1985 the e f f e c t i v e d a t e of a Hearing Panel Order of Suspension en te red i n F i l e s DP 73/85; DP 113185. That Hearing Panel Order of Suspension was f o r a per iod of 45 Days b u t was increased t o a suspension of 120 Days by the Attorney Di sc ip l ine Board. That suspension remains i n e f f e c t u n t i l Respondent has complied wi th the r e i n s ta temen t proceedings descr ibed )n M C R 9.123(B).

 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.