Notices

Decision Information

Decision Content

BOARD MEMBERS FREDERICK G. BUESSER, JR. JOHN L. COTE, CHAIRPERSON MSGR. CLEMENT H. KERN DAVID BAKER LEWIS, SECRETARY FRANK J. MCDEVITT, D.O. WILLIAM G. REAMON LYNN H. SHECTER. VICE-CHAIRPERSON

STATE O F MICHIGAN

JOHN F. X . DWAIHY COUNSEL/ADMINISTRATOR

SUITE 1 2 6 0 333 W. FORT STREET DETROIT. MICHIGAN 4 8 2 2 6 TELEPHONE: (3131 9 6 3 - 5 5 5 3

T h i s is t o inform the Courts of the State of Michigan of the following Order of Discipline: NOTICE OF REPRIMAND File No. 35269-A LEE ROY H . TEMROWSKI (P21324), 20477 Van Dyke Avenue, Detroit, MI 46234, by Oakland Circuit Hearing Panel No. 1 of the former State Bar Grievance Board, affirmed by the Attorney Disci- pline Board and l a t e r by the Michigan Supreme Court, w i t h Opinion, effect ive August 28, -1980. - Respondent was charged with taking custody of an automobile owned by the spouse of his divorce c l i e n t , ostensibly fo r safekeeping and without consent to use said property. Respondent was charged w i t h permitting the automobile t o be repossessed a f t e r removing certain property/parts therefrom and converting the same to his own use despite demands fo r return of the property by the c l i e n t and c l i e n t ' s spouse. The Complaint charged violations of Canon 1 , DR 1-102 ( A ) (1) and (4-6), Canon 2 , DR 2-106 (A) (B) , Canon 5 , DR 5-104 ( A ) and Canon 9, DR 9-102 ( B ) (4 ) .

The Hearing Panel found tha t Respondent anticipated an award of the vehicle to his c l i en t and entered into an oral contract for i t s purchase; the Panel rejected the cl ient-complainant's contention t o the contrary. Also, the Panel rejected the allegations of an excessive fee and accepted Respondent's claim of an attorney l ien on the automobile. Furthermore, Respondent was exculpated of charges alleging dishonesty, fraud, deceit o r misrepresentation. However, the Panel concluded tha t Respondent's conduct was violative of Canon 5 , DR 5-104 (A) which 1i mi t s business re la t ions with a c l i en t adversely affecting professional judgment.

September 15, 1980.

David Bak D e i r S L e

e i w Pi is i , NE S B e O c A r R e D t

ary

 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.