MEMBERS LOUANN VAN DER WIELE CHAIRPERSON REV. MICHAEL MURRAY VICE-CHAIRPERSON DULCE M. FULLER SECRETARY JAMES A. FINK JOHN W. INHULSEN JONATHAN E. LAUDERBACH BARBARA WILLIAMS FORNEY KAREN D. O'DONOGHUE MICHAEL B. RIZIK, JR.
STATE OF MICHIGAN 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 ASSOCIA TE COUNSEL SHERRY L. MIFSUD OFFICE ADMINISTRATOR ALLYSON M. PLOURDE CASE MANAGER OWEN R. MONTGOMERY CASE MANAGER JULIE M. LOISELLE RECEPTIONISTISECRETARY
NOTICE OF SUSPENSION AND RESTITUTION Case No. 16-76-GA Notice Issued: February 15, 2017 Susan F. Reed, P 26897, Detroit, Michigan, by the Attorney Discipline Board Tri-County Hearing Panel #10.
Suspension - 180 Days, Effective February 14, 2017.1 Based on respondent's default, the hearing panel found that respondent committed professional misconduct during her representation of a client defending against a suit filed by a patron at the client's restaurant who was injured in a physical altercation; in her representation of another client in a criminal matter; by failing to answer two requests for investigation; and by failing to appear for sworn statements when subpoenaed to appear.
The panel found that respondent neglected a legal matter entrusted to the lawyer, in violation of MRPC 1.1 (c); failed to seek the lawful objectives of her client, in violation of MRPC 1.2(a); failed to act with reasonable diligence and promptness, in violation of MRPC 1.3; failed to keep her clients reasonably informed about the status of their matters, in violation of MRPC 1.4(a); failed to explain the matters to her clients to the extent necessary to permit the clients to make informed decisions regarding the representation, in violation of MRPC 1.4(b); failed to surrender papers to which the client was entitled upon termination of representation, in violation of MRPC 1.16(d ); knowingly disobeyed an obligation under the rules of a tribunal except for an open refusal based on the assertion that no valid obligation exists, in violation of MRPC 3.4(c); knowingly failed to respond to a lawful demand for information from a disciplinary authority, in violation of MRPC 8.1 (a)(2); and failed to answer two requests for investigation in conformity with MCR 9.113(A), in violation of MCR 9.104(7). Respondent was also found to have violated MCR 9.104(1 )-(4); and MRPC 8.4(a)-(c).
The panel ordered that respondent's license to practice law be suspended for a period of 180 days. The panel also ordered that respondent be required to pay restitution in the amount of $21,346.22 to one complainant as requested by the Grievance Administrator. Costs were assessed in th amount of $1 ,6 4.91.
1 Respondent has been continuously suspended from the practice of law in Michigan since October 20,2016. Please see Notice of Interim Suspension Pursuant to MeR 9.115(H)(1), issued October 20,2016.