STATE OF MICHIGAN
FILED ATTORNEY DISCIPLINE BOARD June 30, 2020
Attorney Discipline Board
GRIEVANCE ADMINISTRATOR, Attorney Grievance Commission,
Petitioner/Appellant, v JEFFREY R. SHARP, P 53838, Respondent/Appellee. /
Case No. 19-80-GA
BOARD ORDER INCREASING DISCIPLINE FROM A 30-DAY SUSPENSION TO A 180-DAY SUSPENSION, VACATING CONDITION AND DISMISSING MOTION TO INCREASE DISCIPLINE
Issued by the Attorney Discipline Board 333 W. Fort St., Ste. 1700, Detroit, MI
Tri-County Hearing Panel #57 issued an Order of Suspension with Condition on February 25, 2020, suspending respondent’s license to practice law for a period of 30 days, effective March 18, 2020. The condition imposed by the panel required respondent to provide written verification to the Grievance Administrator and the Board that he contacted the State Bar of Michigan’s Lawyers and Judges Assistance Program (LJAP) to schedule a mental health evaluation by April 18, 2020, and to provide the Grievance Administrator, or his designee, with a copy of his evaluation upon receipt. The order further indicated that if respondent failed to comply with the condition, and upon the filing of an affidavit and motion by the Grievance Administrator attesting to the same, an order would be issued suspending respondent’s license to practice law in Michigan for an additional 60 days.
On February 28, 2020, the Grievance Administrator petitioned the Attorney Discipline Board for review of the hearing panel’s order as to the level of discipline. On April 29, 2020, the Administrator also filed a Motion to Increase Discipline Pursuant to The Panel’s Order on Sanction. In an order dated May 1, 2020, the Attorney Discipline Board entered an order holding the Administrator’s motion in abeyance pending the Board’s decision on the petition for review.
The Attorney Discipline Board has conducted virtual review proceedings via Zoom video-conferencing in accordance with General Order ADB 2020-1, and MCR 9.118, which included a review of the record before the hearing panel and consideration of the argument and brief presented by the Grievance Administrator. Respondent did not file a responsive brief nor did he appear for the proceedings held before the Board. For the reasons discussed in the attached opinion, discipline is increased to a 180-day suspension and the condition imposed by the hearing panel is vacated.
NOW THEREFORE, IT IS ORDERED that discipline in this case is increased from a suspension of 30 days to a 180-DAY SUSPENSION EFFECTIVE MARCH 18, 2020, and until further order of the Supreme Court, the Attorney Discipline Board or a hearing panel, and until respondent complies with the requirements of MCR 9.123(B) and MCR 9.124.
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that respondent shall comply with all applicable provisions of MCR 9.119.
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the condition imposed by Tri-County Hearing Panel #57 in the February 25, 2020 order is VACATED.
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the Grievance Administrator’s motion to increase discipline filed on April 29, 2020 is DISMISSED as MOOT.
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that respondent shall, on or before July 22, 2020, pay costs incurred by the Attorney Discipline Board for the transcript of the review proceedings conducted on May 12, 2020, in the amount of $146.50. This amount is in addition to the costs previously assessed in the hearing panel order of February 25, 2020, together with interest pursuant to MCR 9.128. Total costs assessed and owed are $1906.13. Check or money order shall be made payable to the Attorney Discipline System, and submitted to the Attorney Discipline Board [333 W. Fort St., Suite 1700, Detroit, MI 48226] for proper crediting. (See attached instruction sheet).
By:
ATTORNEY DISCIPLINE BOARD
Jonathan E. Lauderbach, Chairperson
Dated: June 30, 2020
Board members Jonathan E. Lauderbach, Barbara Williams Forney, James A. Fink, Karen D. O'Donoghue, John W. Inhulsen, Linda Hotchkiss, MD., Michael S. Hohauser and Peter Smit concur in this decision.
Board member Michael B. Rizik, Jr., was absent and did not participate.