BOARD MEMBERS JOHN L . COTE. CHAIRPERSON LEO A. FARHAT MSGR. CLEMENT H. KERN DAVID BAKER LEWIS. SECRETARY f RAN6 J. MCDEVITT. D . 0 . WILLIAM G . REAMON LYNN H . SHECTER. VICE-CHAIRPERSON
,".1 :E O F M I C H I G A N
MAILING ADDRESS: P. 0. BOX 149 DETROIT. MICHIGAN 48231
J O H N F. X. DWAIHY EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR 6 GENERAL COUNSEL
SUITE 1260 3 3 3 W.FORT STREET DETROIT. MICHIGAN 4 8 2 2 6 T E L E P H O N E : ( ~ I ~9) 6 3 - 5 5 5 3
NOTICE OF REPRIMAND DP-169181 and DP-56/81
MARK H. TEKLINSKI (P 21319), 28225 Mound Road, Warren, MI, 48092, by Attorney Discipline Board Macomb County Hearing Panel "A", approving a stipulation for discipline by consent.
(1) Reprimand; (2) Effective March 2, 1983.
Respondent, in a stipulation for consent order of dis- cipline of reprimand, admitted to the charges contained in two separate
Complaints, to-wit: misrepresentation to the Court of Appeals regarding the filing of a brief; neglect of a divorce matter including failure to protect the client's interest by allowing a default judgment to be entered, failure to take action to set aside default, failure to file a counter-complaint, failure to negotiate a property settlement and failure to enter an order allowing respondent's withdrawal as counsel;
in a separate criminal matter, failure to file an application for leave to appeal resulting in dismissal of the client's cause and wil-
ful neglect of said criminal appeal after receipt of fees or partial fees; that respondent was retained to seek a "peace bond" or other equitable relief from alleged harassment of his client, that respondent falsely advised the client that the neighbor had been served a "peace bond", that respondent refused to provide a copy of said "peace bond" to conceal said misrepresentation, that respondent failed to file a
civil complaint on behalf of said client and falsely advised the client that a hearing would be held in the matter on a date(s) certain.
The admitted complaint charged violations of GCR 1963, 953(1-4) and Canons 1, 2, 6, and 7 of the Code of Professional Responsibility.
The Grievance Administrator agreed to a reprimand in ex- change for admission to the charges contained in the complaint. The stipulation for consent discipline of reprimand was rejected by the At- torney Discipline Board; this rejection was appealed to the Michigan Supreme Court by the Grievance Administrator. Subsequently the mat-
ter was assigned to a hearing panel pursuant to a court rule amendment authorizing panels to receive and consider consent discipline stipulations; GCR 1963, 964.6(e).