STATE OF MICHIGAN Attorney Discipline Board
GRIEVANCE ADMINISTRATOR, Attorney Grievance Commission,
Petitioner, v PAMELA RADZINSKI, P 43451,
fiLED AlrORNfY D1SCfPlINE BOARD
12 JUL 27 4"11=22
Case No. 12-38-MZ (Ref. 10-104-GA; 10-135-GA)
Respondent. ______________________~ I
ORDER AFFIRMING HEARING PANEL ORDER OF SUSPENSION AND RESTITUTION WITH CONDITION (BY CONSENT)
Issued by the Attorney Discipline Board 211 W. Fort St., Ste. 1410, Detroit, MI
Tri-County Hearing Panel #63 entered an Order of Suspension and Restitution With Condition (By Consent) on June 15, 2011. The order was based upon a stipulation for a consent order of discipline filed by the Grievance Admin istrator and the respondent on May 9, 2011 , in accordance with the procedures described in MCR 9.115(F)(5). I n addition to the agreement of the parties that respondent's license to practice law should be suspended for 270 days, the stipulation included a provision that respondent should make restitution to complainant Heleen Beckman in the amount of $1,000.00. A copy of the stipulation was served on complainant Beckman on May 9, 2011, the day the stipulation was filed with the hearing panel.
The delayed petition for review filed by complainant Beckman was granted by the chairperson of the Attorney Discipline Board and review proceedings have been conducted by the Board in accordance with MCR 9.118. It is the position of the complainant that restitution of unearned fees in the amount of $1,000.00 is insufficient and that respondent should be ordered to return the additional sum of $2, 000.00 to her. The Board has considered the briefs which have been filed, together with the arguments presented at the review hearing conducted on July 11, 2012, and the Board is otherwise fully advised;
NOW THEREFORE, IT IS ORDERED that the hearing panel Order of Suspension and Restitution with Condition (By Consent) entered by Tri-County Hearing Panel #63 on June 15, 2011, is AFFIRMED. The Board is not persuaded that the hearing panel erred by accepting the terms of the stipulation for consent order of discipline agreed to by the respondent and the Grievance Administratorwith the prior approval of the Attorney Grievance Commission or that vacating the panel's order and remanding this matter for a full evidentiary hearing is warranted under the circumstances.
By:
DATED: July 27,2012 Board members Thomas G. Kienbaum, James M. Cameron, Jr., Rdsalind E. Griffin, M.D., Andrea L. Solak, Carl E. Ver Beek, Craig H. Lubben, Lawrence G. Campbell, and DulceM. Fuller concur in this decision.
Board Member Sylvia P. Whitmer, Ph.D~, did not participate.' .