B O A R D M E M B E R S F R E D E R I C K G. B U E S S E R . J R . JOHN L. COTE, CHAIRPERSON M S G R . C L E M E N T H. K E R N DAVID BAKER LEWIS, SECRETARY FRANK J. MCDEVITT. 0 . 0 . WILLIAM G. R E A M O N LYNN H . SHECTER. V I C E - C H A I R P E R S O N
STATE O F M I C H I G A N
J O H N F. X . DWAIHY C O U N S E L / A D M I N I S T R A T O R
S U I T E I 2 6 0 333 W. FORT S T R E E T DETROIT. M I C H I G A N 4 8 2 2 6
T E L E P H O N E : 1313) 9 6 3 - 5 5 5 3
This i s t o inform the Courts of the State of Michigan of the following Order of Discipline:
NOTICE OF REPRIMAND File No. DP-31/80 Related: 37000
)
THOF4AS A . NICKELS (P27008), 150 E . Chisholm, P.O. Box 274, Alpena, M I 49707, by Attorney Discipline Board 21st Circuit Hearing Panel. (1 ) Reprimand; (2) Effective October 13, 1980. Respondent was charged in a one-count Complaint w i t h personally, or through an agent of h is , causing the words "S/Judge Harrison" to be placed on the signature l i n e of a proposed Circuit Court Order allow- ing delayed claim of appeal and caused said order to be mailed from Respon- dent 's place of business to the Department of Labor, Michigan Employment Security Commission in Detroit , Michigan, knowing that said proposed order had not been granted or signed by the Circuit Judge and intending tha t said words would s ignify tha t an original order had been signed by the Circuit Judge, with intent t o deceive the Appeal Board of said Department of Labor. The Complaint fur ther charges that,when required to do so, Respondent made no ef for t t o explain, c l a r i f y , r ec t i fy or rescind said purported order. Respondent was charged with violations of GCR 953 and Canon 1 of the Code of Professional Responsi bil i t y , DR 1-102 ( A ) ( 4 ) ( 5 ) .
The Hearing Panel determined that Respondent knew or should have known tha t the proposed Order Granting a Delayed Claim of Appeal upon which Respondent placed the words "S/Judge Harrison" s ignif ied tha t i t was a copy of an original Order and would mislead the Employment Security Commission and t h e i r attorneys; however, the Panel did not specif ical ly conclude that Respondent knowingly and intent ional ly misled the M.E.S.C. The Panel did find tha t Respondent a t some point became aware tha t the Attorney General and Employment Security Commission were misled by said proposed order and, that Respondent took no action or e f f o r t t o explain, c l a r i fy or rescind the purported order, despite requests from Circuit Judge Michael Harrison t o so explain, c l a r i fy , rec t i fy or rescind said order. The Panel determined t h a t Respondent violated GCR 953 (1 ) b u t made no finding of a violation of Canon 1 ,
)
DR 1-102 ( A ) (4 ) and (5) of the Code of Professional Responsibility which prohibits decei t ful , fraudulent and dishonest conduct and conduct prejudicial t o the administration of just ice . The Hearing Panel assessed Respondent costs in the amount of $369.99. & ~ Q l r , l / e L c n I October 21, 1980 David Baker Lewis. Secretary