MEMBERS LINDA S. HOTCHKISS, MD CHAIRPERSON ALAN GERSHEL
VICE-CHAIRPERSON REV. DR. LOUIS J. PRUES
SECRETARY PETER A. SMIT LINDA M. ORLANS
JASON M. TURKISH ANDREAS SIDIROPOULOS, MD
KATIE STANLEY TISH VINCENT
STATE OF MICHIGAN ATTORNEY DISCIPLINE BOARD
333 WEST FORT STREET, SUITE 1700 DETROIT, MICHIGAN 48226-3147
MARK A. ARMITAGE EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR
— WENDY A. NEELEY DEPUTY DIRECTOR
— KAREN M. DALEY ASSOCIATE COUNSEL
— SHERRY MIFSUD OFFICE ADMINISTRATOR
—
OWEN R. MONTGOMERY CASE MANAGER
—
JULIE M. LOISELLE RECEPTIONIST/SECRETARY
—
www.adbmich.org
PHONE: 313-963-5553
NOTICE OF SUSPENSION (By Consent)
Case No. 22-87-GA Notice Issued: May 31, 2023 Zachary Hallman, P 78327, Dearborn, Michigan, by the Attorney Discipline Board Tri-County Hearing Panel #1
Suspension - 45 Days, Effective May 27, 2023 Respondent and the Grievance Administrator filed a Stipulation for Consent Order of a 45-Day Suspension, pursuant to MCR 9.115(F)(5), which was approved by the Attorney Grievance Commission and accepted by the hearing panel. The stipulation contains respondent’s admission to the factual allegations and allegations of misconduct set forth in the three count formal complaint filed by the Administrator, in its entirety. Specifically, respondent admitted to neglecting a whistleblower action he was retained to file on behalf of a client, failing to reduce his contingency fee agreement with his client to writing, failing to tell his client that the action had been dismissed because of his neglect and unresponsiveness, failing to return his client’s file materials despite a specific request that he do so, failing to respond to a request for investigation subsequently filed by his client, and failing to provide a copy of his client’s entire file when subpoenaed to do so by the Grievance Administrator.
Based upon respondent’s plea of no contest and the parties’ amended stipulation, the panel found that respondent handled a legal matter without preparation adequate in the circumstances, in violation of MRPC 1.1(b) (Count One); neglected a legal matter entrusted to him, in violation of MRPC 1.1(c) (Count One); failed to seek lawful objectives of client, in violation of MRPC 1.2(a) (Count One); failed to act with reasonable diligence and promptness in representing a client, in violation of MRPC 1.3 (Count One); failed to keep a client reasonably informed about the status of a matter, in violation of MRPC 1.4(a) (Count One); failed to explain matter to the extent reasonably necessary to permit the client to make informed decisions regarding the representation, in violation of MRPC 1.4(b) (Count One); failed to reduce his contingency fee agreement with his client to writing and, or failed to have his client, sign a contingency fee agreement in violation of MRPC 1.5 (Count One); failed to surrender papers and/or property to which the client is entitled, in violation of MRPC 1.16(d) (Count Two); failed to make reasonable efforts to expedite litigation consistent with the interests of the client, in violation of MRPC 3.2 (Count One); knowingly failed to respond to a lawful demand for information from a disciplinary authority, in violation of MRPC 8.1(a)(2) (Count Three); failed to answer the request for investigation in conformity with MCR 9.113(A) and (B)(2), and in
violation of MCR 9.104(7) (Count Three); engaged in conduct that is a violation of the Michigan Rules of Professional Conduct, in violation of MRPC 8.4(a) and MCR 9.104(4) (Count Three); engaged in conduct involving dishonesty, fraud, deceit, misrepresentation or violation of the criminal law, where such conduct reflects adversely on the lawyer's honesty, trustworthiness, or fitness as a lawyer, in violation of MRPC 8.4(b) (Count One); engaged in conduct prejudicial to the administration of justice, in violation of MCR 9.104(1) and MRPC 8.4(c) (Counts One, Two and Three); engaged in conduct that exposes the legal profession or the courts to obloquy, contempt, censure, or reproach, in violation of MCR 9.104(2) (Counts One and Two); and engaged in conduct that is contrary to justice, ethics, honesty, or good morals, in violation of MCR 9.104(3) (Counts One and Two).
In accordance with the stipulation of the parties, the hearing panel ordered that respondent’s license to practice law in Michigan be suspended for 45 days, effective May 27, 2023, as agreed to by the parties. Total costs were assessed in the amount of $1,540.21.