Notices

Decision Information

Decision Content

MEMBERS JONATHAN E. LAUDERBACH CHAIRPERSON MICHAEL B. RIZIK, JR. VICE-CHAIRPERSON BARBARA WILLIAMS FORNEY SECRETARY KAREN D. O’DONOGHUE LINDA S. HOTCHKISS, MD

MICHAEL S. HOHAUSER PETER A. SMIT ALAN GERSHEL LINDA M. ORLANS

STATE OF MICHIGAN ATTORNEY DISCIPLINE BOARD

333 WEST FORT STREET, SUITE 1700

MARK A. ARMITAGE EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR WENDY A. NEELEY DEPUTY DIRECTOR KAREN M. DALEY ASSOCIATE COUNSEL SHERRY MIFSUD OFFICE ADMINISTRATOR

ALLYSON M. PLOURDE CASE MANAGER OWEN R. MONTGOMERY CASE MANAGER JULIE M. LOISELLE RECEPTIONIST/SECRETARY

DETROIT, MICHIGAN 48226-3147

PHONE: 313-963-5553

www.adbmich.org

NOTICE OF REPRIMAND (By Consent)

Case No. 21-13-GA Notice Issued: May 4, 2021 Leslie K. Aycock, P 57341, Wyandotte, Michigan, by the Attorney Discipline Board Tri-County Hearing Panel #22.

Reprimand, Effective May 1, 2021 Respondent and the Grievance Administrator filed a Stipulation for Consent Order of Discipline and Waiver, in accordance with MCR 9.115(F)(5), which was approved by the Attorney Grievance Commission and accepted by the hearing panel. Based upon respondent’s admissions and the stipulation of the parties, the panel found that respondent committed professional misconduct as the result of her improper use of an IOLTA account from January 2018 through October 2019.

Specifically, the panel found that respondent held funds other than client or third person funds in an IOLTA, in violation of MRPC 1.15(a)(3); deposited her own funds into an IOLTA in an amount more than reasonably necessary to pay financial institution service charges or fees, in violation of MRPC 1.15(f); and engaged in conduct that was contrary to justice, ethics, honesty, or good morals, in violation of MCR 9.104(3). Respondent was also found to have violated MCR 9.104(2)) and MRPC 8.4(a).

In accordance with the stipulation of the parties, the hearing panel ordered that respondent be reprimanded. Costs were assessed in the amount of $915.30.

 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.