B O A R D M E M B E R S FREDERICK G. B U E S S E R , J R JOHN L. COT^, CHAIRPERSON
MSGR CLEMENT H K E R N DAVID BAKER LEWIS, SECRETARY FRANK J MCDEVITT, D 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 OF MICHIGAN 0-p Di$cipIinp
,,XwZ ? , > -
Ow
DWAIHY ~xecu"t%"vF$% l r e c t o r & General Counsel SUITE 1 2 6 0 3 3 3 W FORT STREET DETROIT, M I C H I G A N 4 8 2 2 6 T E L E P H O N E (313) 9 6 3 - 5 5 5 3
This is to inform the Courts of the State of Michigan of the following Order of Discipline:
NOTICE OF REVOCATION File No. DP-117/80 Related No. 335/80, 450/80
W. STEVEN KOSTECKE (P16166), 30100 Telegraph Road, Suite 475, ~irmingham; MI 48010. The two count Formal Complaint charged: That Respondent, as Plaintiff's counsel, received and negotiated a draft in the amount of $8,200.00 in satisfaction of his client's claim; that Respondent prepared and mailed to the client, or caused the same, a check for the full amount due said client, that said check was dishonored by the bank for reason of insufficient funds, and that Respondent commingled and/or converted to his own use the sum of $4,318.37, paid him for the benefit of his client, in violation of Canons ? and 9 of the Code of Professional Responsibility, to-wit: DR 1-102 (A), DR 9-102 (A) (B), and GCR 953. Count two of the Complaint charges that Respondent prepared and mailed, or caused the same,? a check to a client in the amount of $6,200.00 as sat- isfaction in full of the client" distributive share, pursuant to settlement of a personal injury matter, that said check was dishonored for insufficient funds, that the law firm which had retained Respondent issued client a check for the full amount, that despite inquiries of the client and the law firm which had hired Respondent, Respondent has failed to account for the funds, and commingled and converted said funds to his own use, in violation of Canons 1 and 9, DR 1-102 (A), DR 9-102 (A) (B) and GCR 953. The Grievance Administrator and the Respondent entered into an aqreement, whereby Respon- dent submitted his resiqnation, pursuant to GCR 964.13; under the provisions of that Court Rule, the Hearing Panel entered findings that the allegations of the Formal Complaint had been established, pursuant to Respondent's default and stipulation, and entered an Order revoking Respondent's license. Effect
Date of Issuance:
FEB 9 ~ ~ ~ ~ T T O RDINSECIYPL INE BOARD
FEZ ;- ," 3 51