MEMBERS LOUANN VAN DER WIELE CHAIRPERSON REV. MICHAEL MURRAY VICE·CHAIRPERSON BARBARA WILLIAMS FORNEY SECRETARY JAMES A. FINK JOHN W. INHULSEN
JONATHAN E. LAUDERBACH KAREN D. O'DONOGHUE
MICHAEL B. RIZIK, JR. LINDA S. HOTCHKISS, MD
STATE OF MICIDGAN ATTORNEY DISCIPLINE BOARD
211 WEST FORT STREET, SUITE 1410
DETROIT, MICHIGAN 48226-3236 PHONE: 313·963-5553 I FAX: 313·963·5571
MARK A. ARMITAGE EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR WENDY A. NEELEY DEPUTY DIRECTOR KAREN M. DALEY ASSOCIATE COUNSEL SHERRY L. MIFSUD OFFICE ADMINISTRATOR
ALLYSON M. PLOURDE CASE MANAGER
OWEN R. MONTGOMERY CASE MANAGER JULIE M. LOISELLE RECEPTION/STISECRETARY
NOTICE OF SUSPENSION AND RESTITUTION WITH CONDITIONS Case No. 17-118-GA Notice Issued: February 15, 2018 Richard Shant Norsigian, P 77410, Royal Oak, Michigan, by the Attorney Discipline Board Tri-County Hearing Panel #64.
Suspension - 60 Days, effective February 14, 2018. Based on respondent's default and his admissions at the November 29, 2017 hearing, the hearing panel found that respondent committed acts of professional misconduct while handling an eviction matter, a notary fraud action, and a quiet title action.
The panel specifically found that respondent neglected a legal matter entrusted to him, in violation of MRPC 1.1 (c); failed to the seek the lawful objectives of a client, by filing a motion for reconsideration without client consent, in violation of MRPC 1.2(a); failed to act with reasonable diligence and promptness in representing a client, in violation of MRPC 1.3; failed to surrender property and papers to which the client is entitled and to refund the advance payment of a fee that has not been earned upon termination of the representation, in violation of MRPC 1.1S(d); and failed to answer a request for investigation, in violation of MCR 9.104(7), MCR 9.113(A), and (B)(2), and MRPC 8.1 (a)(2). Respondent was also found to have violated MCR 9.104(1 )-(3) and MRPC 8.4(a) and (c).
The hearing panel ordered that respondent's license to practice law in Michigan be suspended for SO days, with conditions relevant to the established misconduct, and that respondent pay restitution. Total costs were assessed in the amount of $1,851.22.
Affa~ ar . rmltage-Executive Director