STATE OF MICHIGAN Attorney Discipline Board
GRIEVANCE ADMINISTRATOR, Attorney Grievance Commission,
v
Petitioner/Appellee/Cross-Appellant,
Case No. 15-122-GA
11 JUN -I PM 2: 22
RONALD THOMAS BRUCE, JR., P 62579 Respondent!A ppellant/Cross-Appellee. _________________________________1
ORDER REDUCING SUSPENSION FROM 179 DAYS TO 60 DAYS
Issued by the Attorney Discipline Board 211 W. Fort St., Ste. 1410, Detroit, MI
On May 31, 2016, Tri-County Hearing Panel #23 of the Attorney Discipline Board issued an order suspending respondent's license to practice law in Michigan for a period of 179 days, effective June 22, 2016. Respondent filed a petition for review and request for stay of discipline on June 20, 2016. The discipline ordered by the hearing panel was automatically stayed pursuant to MCR 9.115(K) upon the filing of respondent's petition for review and petition for stay. The Grievance Administrator filed a cross-petition for review on June 29, 2016. The Attorney Discipline Board has conducted review proceedings in accordance with MCR 9.118, including review of the record below, and consideration of the briefs filed by the parties, and the oral arguments presented to the Board at a review hearing conducted on October 19,2016, and is otherwise fully advised,
NOW THEREFORE, IT IS ORDERED that, for the reasons set forth in the attached opinion, discipline imposed by the hearing panel is REDUCED from a suspension of 179 days to a SUSPENSION OF RESPONDENT'S LICENSE TO PRACTICE LAW IN MICHIGAN FOR 60 DAYS EFFECTIVE JUNE 30. 2017, 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 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 himself 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 his active clients, in writing, by registered or certified mail, return receipt requested, of the following:
1. 2.
the nature and duration of the discipline imposed; the effective date of such discipline;
3.
4.
5.
6.
respondent's inability to act as an attorney after the effective date of such discipline;
the location and identity of the custodian of the clients' files and records which will be made available to them or to substitute counsel;
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;
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 ofthis 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).
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that respondent shall, on or before June 30, 2017, pay costs previously assessed by the hearing panel in the amount of $1 ,902.53. Check or money order shall
be made payable to the Attorney Discipline System and submitted to the Attorney Discipline Board, 211 West Fort St., Ste. 1410, Detroit, MI 48226, for proper crediting. (See attached instruction sheet).
ATTORNEY DISCIPLINE BOARD
DATED: June 1, 2017
By:
Louann
Board members Louann Van Der Wiele, Rev. Michael Murray, Dulce M. Fuller, John W. Inhulsen, Jonathan E. Lauderbach, Barbara Williams Forney, Karen D. O'Donoghue, and Michael B. Rizik,
Jr., concur in this decision.
Board member James A. Fink participated in the hearings and deliberations on October 19, 2016, but has not participated in this matter thereafter.