Opinions and Orders

Decision Information

Decision Content

STATE OF MICHIGAN

 

Attorney Discipline Board

 

GRIEVANCE ADMINISTRATOR,

Attorney Grievance Commission,

 

Petitioner/Appellee,

 

v                                                                                                         

Case No.  22-77-GA

BRIAN T. DAILEY, P 39945,

 

Respondent/Appellant.

                                                        /

 

ORDER DENYING RESPONDENTS MOTION FOR RECONSIDERATION

 

Issued by the Attorney Discipline Board

333 W. Fort St., Ste. 1700, Detroit, MI

 

Respondent filed a motion seeking reconsideration of the Attorney Discipline Boards March 24, 2025 order affirming in part and vacating in part findings of misconduct, increasing discipline from a five-year suspension to disbarment, and affirming restitution.  The Grievance Administrator filed a response requesting that respondents motion be denied. 

 

The Board has considered respondents motion together with the response filed by the Grievance Administrator, and is otherwise fully advised;

 

NOW THEREFORE,

 

IT IS ORDERED that respondents motion for reconsideration is DENIED.  Respondents motion merely presents the same issues already ruled on by the Board.  Respondent has failed to demonstrate a palpable error by which the Board has been misled, or to otherwise demonstrate that the March 24, 2025 decision of the Board was entered erroneously, such that correction of the alleged errors would result in a different disposition.

 

 

ATTORNEY DISCIPLINE BOARD

 

 

By:   /s/ Peter A. Smit, Vice-Chairperson

 

Dated: June 11, 2025

 

Board Members Peter A. Smit, Rev. Dr. Louis J. Prues, Linda M. Orlans, Jason M. Turkish, Katie M. Stanley, Tish Vincent, and Kamilia Landrum concur in this decision.

 

Board Member Andreas Sidiropoulos, MD was absent and did not participate in this decision.

 

Board Member Alan Gershel is recused from this matter and did not participate in this decision.

 You are being directed to the most recent version of the statute which may not be the version considered at the time of the judgment.