MEMBERS PATRICK J. KEATING CHAIRMAN
MARTIN M. DOCTOROFF
VICE 0-1AIRMAN 'ARLES C. VINCENT. M.D. iECRETARY REMONA A. GREEN HANLEY M. GURWIN
STATE OF MICHIGAN
JOHN F. VAN BOLT EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR 6 GENERAL COUNSEL
SUITE 1260 333 W FORT STREET DETROIT. MICHIGAN 48226 a
Area Code 313 963-5553
ROBERT S. HARRISON ODESSA KOMER
F i l e Nos. DP 88/85; DP 110185; DP 117185 Leorrard Strickland, P 2!5031, 384 Penobscot Building, D e t r o i t , 48226 by Attorney D i s c i p l i n e Board Wayne County Hearing Panel #24.
M I
(1) Suspension - 3 years ; (2) E f f e c t i v e May 27, 1986. The Hearing Panel considered the a l l e g a t i o n s of misconduct contained i n t h ree Formal Complaints consol idated f o r hear ing . The Respondent d i d n o t answer t h e Formal Complaints and d i d n o t appear a t the hear ing .
The Bearing Panel found tha t the Respondent en t e red h i s appearance on behalf of a c l i e n t i n a c i v i l mat te r then pending i n the Wayne County
C i r c u i t Court b u t t h a t h i s subsequent n e g l e c t , inc luding h i s f a i l u r e t o f i l e respons ive p leadings , r e s u l t e d i n t he d i s m i s s a l of the case . The Panel found t h a t the Respondent f a i l e d to n o t i f y h i s c l i e n t t h a t h e r c a s e had been dismissed and f a i l e d to answer the Request f o r I n v e s t i g a t i o n f i l e d
by the c l i e n t and served upon him by the Grievance Administrator .
I n the second Complaint consol idated f o r hea r ing , the Hearing Pane l found t h a t the Respondent was r e t a ined i n 1981 t o r e p r e s e n t a c l i e n t i n a
poss ib l e medical malpractice claim b u t that he f a i l e d to reduce the terms of h i s con t ingen t agreement t o wr i t ing a s r equ i r ed by the a p p l i c a b l e c o u r t r u l e , f a i l e d t o communicate wi th h i s c l i e n t and f a i l e d t o seek her l e g a l o b j e c t i v e s a f t e r f i l i n g s u i t on her behalf i n 1984. The Respondent d id n o t f i l e a n answer t o t he Request f o r I n v e s t i g a t i o n f i l e d by that c l i e n t . The Panel f u r t h e r found t h a t the Respondent's l i c e n s e to p r a c t i c e law was suspended f o r a per iod of t h i r t y days e f f e c t i v e January 31, 1983, bu t t h a t he f a i l e d t o n o t i f y h i s c l i e n t of h i s change of s t a t u s and f i l e d a f a l s e A f f i d a v i t of Compliance w i t h the Supreme Court.
The Hearing Panel found t h a t the Respondent 's conduct a s a l l e g e d i n those Complaints, t oge the r w i th h i s f a i l u r e t o answer the f i r s t Formal Complaint, cons i tu t ed v i o l a t i o n s of M C R 8.121(F), M C R 9.104(1-4)(7)(8) , MCR 9.113(A)(B)(Z), MCR 9 . 1 2 3 ( ~ )a nd Canons 1,6 & 7 of the Code of P r o f e s s i o n a l Respons ib i l i t y to w i t : DR 1 - 1 0 2 ( ~ ) ( 1 - 3 ) ( 5 ) ( 6 ) , DR 6 - 1 0 1 ( ~ ) ( 2 ) ( 3 ) and DR 7-101 (A)( 1-3).
I n a s s e s s i n g a suspension of t h ree y e a r s , t he Hearing Panel noted Respondent' s p r i o r h i s to ry of d i s c i p l i n e f o r misconduct c o n s i s t i n g of a ninety-day suspension i n 1981, a t h i r t y day suspension i n 1983, and a n i n e month suspension i n 1985. Costs were a s se s sed i n t he amount of $165.73.