Notices

Decision Information

Decision Content

MEMBERS MICHAEL B. RIZIK, JR. CHAIRPERSON LINDA S. HOTCHKISS, MD VICE-CHAIRPERSON REV. DR. LOUIS J. PRUES SECRETARY KAREN D. O’DONOGHUE MICHAEL S. HOHAUSER

PETER A. SMIT ALAN GERSHEL LINDA M. ORLANS JASON M. TURKISH

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. 22-51-GA Notice Issued: January 31, 2023 Patrick E. Nyenhuis, P 76343, Grosse Pointe Park, Michigan, by the Attorney Discipline Board Tri-County Hearing Panel #3

Reprimand, effective January 28, 2023 Respondent and the Grievance Administrator filed an Amended Stipulation for Consent Order of Discipline and Waiver, pursuant to MCR 9.115(F)(5), that was approved by the Attorney Grievance Commission and accepted by the hearing panel. Based upon respondent’s no contest plea as set forth in the parties’ amended stipulation, the panel found that respondent committed professional misconduct while representing a client during a police interrogation involving a shooting death in which respondent’s client was a suspect.

Based upon respondent’s plea of contest and the parties’ amended stipulation, the panel found that respondent failed to seek the lawful objectives of a client through reasonable available means permitted by law and these rules, in violation of MRPC 1.2(a); and, counseled a client to engage or assist a client, in conduct that the lawyer reasonably should know is illegal or fraudulent, in violation of MRPC 1.2(c). The panel also found that respondent violated MCR 9.104(1)-(3) and MRPC 8.4(c).

In accordance with the stipulation of the parties, the hearing panel ordered that respondent be reprimanded. Costs were assessed in the amount of $912.67.

 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.