NOTICE OF SUSPENSION WITH CONDITION
Case Nos. 23-75-JC; 23-76-GA
Notice Issued: May 22, 2024
Julie D. Anderson, P 62517, Ferndale, Michigan
Suspension - 180 Days, Effective May 22, 2024[1]
The Grievance Administrator filed a combined Notice of Filing of Judgment of Conviction and a two-count Formal Complaint against respondent. The notice, filed in accordance with MCR 9.120(B)(3), stated that respondent was convicted of operating while impaired, a misdemeanor. The Formal Complaint alleged that respondent committed professional misconduct by failing to provide notice of her conviction to the Attorney Discipline Board and Attorney Grievance Commission as required by MCR 9.120(A) and (B), and by failing to answer a request for investigation from the Grievance Administrator.
Based on respondent’s conviction, Tri-County Hearing Panel #53 found that respondent engaged in conduct that violated a criminal law of a state or of the United States, an ordinance, or tribal law pursuant to MCR 2.615, in violation of MCR 9.104(5).
Based on respondent’s default and the evidence presented at the hearing, the panel found that respondent failed to provide notice of her conviction, in violation of MCR 9.120(A) and (B) and MRPC 8.1(a)(2) [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 and Two]; 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]; engaged in conduct that is contrary to justice, ethics, honesty, or good morals, in violation of MCR 9.104(3) [Counts One and Two]; engaged in conduct that violates the standards and rules of professional conduct adopted by the Supreme Court, in violation of MCR 9.104(4) [Counts One and Two]; failed to answer a request for investigation in conformity with MCR 9.113(A) and (B)(2), in violation of MCR 9.104(7) [Count Two]; and knowingly failed to respond to a lawful demand for information, in violation of MRPC 8.1(a)(2) [Count Two].
The Panel ordered that respondent’s license to practice law in Michigan be suspended for 180 days and that she be subject to a condition relevant to the established misconduct. Costs were assessed in the amount of $2,016.58.
[1] Respondent has been continuously suspended from the practice of law in Michigan since December 26, 2023. Please see Notice of Interim Suspension Pursuant to MCR 9.115(H)(1), issued January 2, 2024.