STATE OF MICHIGAN
Attorney Discipline Board
GRIEVANCE ADMINISTRATOR,
Attorney Grievance Commission,
Petitioner/Appellee,
v Case No. 22-24-GA
STEPHANIE A. CARSON, P 57096,
Respondent/Appellant.
/
ORDER REDUCING SUSPENSION FROM 180 DAYS
TO 60 DAYS AND AFFIRMING CONDITION
On September 19, 2023, Tri-County Hearing Panel #2 issued an order suspending respondent’s license to practice law in Michigan for a period of 180 days, effective October 11, 2023, with a condition that requires her to attend the State Bar of Michigan’s seminar titled “Tips and Tools for Successful Practice.” Respondent filed a timely petition for review and for a stay of the effective date of the hearing panel’s order of suspension with condition. On October 11, 2023, the Board entered an order granting respondent’s petition for stay, on an interim basis, pending further consideration by the Board. On October 31, 2023, an order granting respondent’s petition for a stay was entered staying the hearing panel’s order of suspension with condition, pending completion of the review proceedings before the Board.
The Attorney Discipline Board has conducted review proceedings in accordance with MCR 9.118, including review of the record before the hearing panel and consideration of the briefs and arguments presented by the parties. For the reasons discussed in the attached opinion, discipline is reduced to a 60-day suspension and the condition imposed by the hearing panel is affirmed.
NOW THEREFORE,
IT IS ORDERED that discipline in this case is reduced from 180-day suspension of respondent’s license to practice law in Michigan to a 60-DAY SUSPENSION, EFFECTIVE JUNE 6, 2024, 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(A).
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the condition imposed by the hearing panel is AFFIRMED. Respondent shall attend the next scheduled State Bar of Michigan seminar titled “Tips and Tools for Successful Practice,” and shall file written proof of her attendance with the Attorney Grievance Commission and the Attorney Discipline Board, within 10 days of her attendance.
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that respondent shall not be eligible for reinstatement in accordance with MCR 9.123(A) or (B) unless she has fully complied with the condition in this order.
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that from the effective date of this order and until reinstatement in accordance with the applicable provisions of MCR 9.123, respondent is forbidden from practicing law in any form; appearing as an attorney before any court, judge, justice, board, commission or other public authority; or holding herself out as an attorney by any means.
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that, in accordance with MCR 9.119(A), respondent shall, within seven days after the effective date of this order, notify all of her active clients, in writing, by registered or certified mail, return receipt requested, of the following:
1. the nature and duration of the discipline imposed;
2. the effective date of such discipline;
3. respondent’s inability to act as an attorney after the effective date of such discipline;
4. the location and identity of the custodian of the clients’ files and records which will be made available to them or to substitute counsel;
5. that the clients may wish to seek legal advice and counsel elsewhere; provided that, if respondent was a member of a law firm, the firm may continue to represent each client with the client’s express written consent;
6. the address to which all correspondence to respondent may be addressed.
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that in accordance with MCR 9.119(B), respondent must, on or before the effective date of this order, in every matter in which respondent is representing a client in litigation, file with the tribunal and all parties a notice of respondent’s disqualification from the practice of law.
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that, respondent shall, within 14 days after the effective date of this order, file with the Grievance Administrator and the Attorney Discipline Board an affidavit of compliance as required by MCR 9.119(C).
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that respondent's conduct after the entry of this order but prior to its effective date, shall be subject to the restrictions set forth in MCR 9.119(D); and respondent's compensation for legal services shall be subject to the restrictions described in MCR 9.119(F).
DATED: May 8, 2024
Board members Peter A. Smit, Rev. Dr. Louis J. Prues, Linda M. Orlans, Jason M. Turkish, Andreas Sidiropoulos, MD, Katie Stanley, and, Tish Vincent concur in this decision.
Board member Alan Gershel concurs with the majority’s decision to decrease the length of the suspension imposed by the hearing panel, but dissents from the majority decision to impose a 60‑day suspension. He would impose a 120-day suspension.
Board member Kamilia Landrum was absent and did not participate.