BOARD MEMBE RS JOHN L . COTE. CHAIRPERSON LEO A . FARHAT MSGR. CLEMENT H . *ERN DAVID BAKER LEWIS. SECRETARY FRANK J. MCDEVITT. 0.0 . WILLIAM G . REAMON LYNN H . SHECTER. VICE-CHAIRPERSON
STATE OF 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 C O U N S E L
SUITE 1 2 6 0 333 W.FORT STREET
DETROIT. MICHIGAN 4 8 2 2 6 T € L E P H O N E : ( ~ I ~ )9 6 3 -5553
NOTICE OF SUSPENSION
DP-11/82? DP-56/82, DP-55/82, DP-166/81 (Consol idated)
HUBERT J . MORTON, J R . (P 25940), 1717 C i ty National Bank Bldg., D e t r o i t , M I 48226, by t h e Attorney D i s c i p l i n e Board i n c r e a s i n g t h e d i s c i p l i n e imposed by t h e hea r ing panel .
(1) Suspension; (2) For a per iod of s i x t y (60) days; (3 ) E f f e c t i v e January 6 , 1983.
The hear ing panel found t h a t Respondent had v i o l a t e d GCR 1963, 953(7) and 962.2(b) f o r h i s f a i l u r e t o answer s e p a r a t e r eques t s f o r in - v e s t i g a t i o n and formal complaints f i l e d by t h e Grievance Adminis t ra tor . The Board, no t ing a p r i o r record of f a i l u r e t o answer d i s c i p l i n a r y com- p l a i n t s and r e q u e s t s f o r i n v e s t i g a t i o n i n connect ion w i t h neg lec t charges , i nc reased the reprimand t o a suspension of s i x t h days. The Board i n i t s opin ion s t a t e d : "In a s s e s s i n g t h e a p p r o p r i a t e l e v e l of d i s c i p l i n e , t h e Board must d e a l wi th t h e exacerba t ing f a c t o r of r e sponden t ' s p rev ious h i s t o r y of d i s c i p l i n e inc lud ing a Board o rde r of reprimand (which was a mod i f i ca t ion of a pane l s i x t y day suspension and reprimand) and a hear- i ng panel suspension of s i x t y days. The record of t h e s e p r i o r proceed- ings i s r e p l e t e w i t h examples of respondent ' s a t t i t u d e regard ing t h e s e proceedings and inc ludes f a i l u r e t o answer o r t imely f i l e answers, f a i l - u r e t o appear and f a i l u r e t o make t imely payment of c o s t s . Regarding t h e four complaints p r e s e n t l y pending be fo re u s , Respondent has aga in f a i l e d t o answer r e s u l t i n g i n e n t r y of d e f a u l t s and a d d i t i o n a l formal complaints f o r t he f a i l u r e s t o answer. These a d d i t i o n a l complaints ...a l s o went unanswered r e s u l t i n g aga in i n d e f a u l t . " The Board a l s o noted t h a t Respondent 's appea l i n t h i s ca se was a l s o f i l e d l a t e . The Board f u r t h e r s t a t e d i n i t s opinion: "The e f f e c t i v e n e s s of t h e d i sc ip - l i n a r y process depends upon t imely answers t o p leadings and r e q u e s t s f o r i n v e s t i g a t i o n . Our d e c i s i o n today w i l l s e r v e n o t i c e t o respondent and t h e Bar a t l a r g e t h a t a f u l l , f a i r and t imely response t o r e q u e s t s f o r i n v e s t i g a t i o n and formal complaints is c r i t i c a l l y important ." Costs
were assessed i n t h e amount of $473.21.