REPRIMAND WITH CONDITION (BY CONSENT)

Ethan D. Baker, P73588, Troy, by the Attorney Discipline Board Tri-County Hearing Panel #81. Reprimand, effective Sept. 29, 2022.

The respondent and the grievance administrator filed a Stipulation for Consent Order of Discipline pursuant to MCR 9.115(F)(5) that was approved by the Attorney Grievance Commission and accepted by the hearing panel. Based upon the respondent’s admissions and the stipulation of the parties, the panel found that the respondent committed professional misconduct by improperly using his IOLTA account held at JP Morgan Chase Bank from July-November 2018.

Specifically, and in accordance with the parties’ stipulation, the panel found that the respondent held funds other than client or third-person funds in an IOLTA in violation of MRPC 1.15(a)(3); deposited his own funds into an IOLTA in an amount more than reasonably necessary to pay financial institution service charges or fees in violation of MRPC 1.15(f); and engaged in conduct that was in violation of the Rules of Professional Conduct in violation of MRPC 8.4(a).

In accordance with the stipulation of the parties, the hearing panel ordered that the respondent be reprimanded and subject to a condition relevant to the established misconduct. Costs were assessed in the amount of $772.79.

REPRIMAND WITH CONDITIONS (BY CONSENT)

S. Garrett Beck, P27668, Petoskey, by the Attorney Discipline Board Emmet County Hearing Panel #1. Reprimand, effective Sept. 20, 2022.

The respondent and the grievance administrator filed a Stipulation for Consent Order of Reprimand with Conditions pursuant to MCR 9.115(F)(5) that was approved by the Attorney Grievance Commission and accepted by the hearing panel. Based upon the respondent’s plea of no contest as set forth in the parties’ stipulation and in accordance with the parties’ stipulation, the panel found that the respondent engaged in frivolous litigation as he asserted issues and brought proceedings that had no basis in law or fact in violation of MRPC 3.1 (count 1); brought or defended a proceeding or issue for which there was no basis for doing so in violation of MRPC 3.1 (count 2); violated or attempted to violate the Rules of Professional Conduct in violation of MRPC 8.4(a) (counts 1-2); engaged in conduct that is prejudicial to the administration of justice in violation of MRPC 8.4(c) and MCR 9.104(1) (counts 1-2); and engaged in conduct that exposes the legal profession or the courts to obloquy, contempt, censure, or reproach in violation of MCR 9.104(2) (counts 1-2).

In accordance with the stipulation of the parties, the hearing panel ordered that the respondent be reprimanded and subject to conditions relevant to the established misconduct. Costs were assessed in the amount of $1,006.21.

REINSTATEMENT

On Aug. 2, 2022, the hearing panel issued an Order of Suspension with Conditions (By Consent), suspending the respondent from the practice of law in Michigan for 30 days effective Aug. 24, 2022. On Sept. 23, 2022, the respondent, Isaiah Lipsey, submitted an affidavit and an amended affidavit pursuant to MCR 9.123(A) showing that he has fully complied with all requirements of the Order of Suspension with Conditions (By Consent). On Sept. 23, 2022, the board was advised that the grievance administrator has no objection to the affidavit; and the board being otherwise advised;

NOW THEREFORE,

IT IS ORDERED that the respondent, Isaiah Lipsey, is REINSTATED to the practice of law in Michigan effective Sept. 23, 2022.

DISBARMENT (BY CONSENT)

Jay A. Schwartz, P45268, Northville, by the Attorney Discipline Board Tri-County Hearing Panel #21. Disbarment, effective Nov. 17, 2021.

The respondent and the grievance administrator filed a Stipulation for Consent Order of Disbarment which was approved by the Attorney Grievance Commission and accepted by the hearing panel. The stipulation contained the respondent’s admission that he was convicted by jury verdict of one count of bribery conspiracy concerning programs receiving federal funds, a felony, in violation of 18 § USC 666(a)(2) and 18 § USC 371 and two counts of bribery concerning programs receiving federal funds, felonies, in violation of 18 § USC 666(a)(2) in United States of America v. Jay A. Schwartz, United States District Court, Eastern District of Michigan Case No. 3:19 cr 20451 RHC. In accordance with MCR 9.120(B)(1), the respondent’s license to practice law in Michigan was automatically suspended effective Nov. 17, 2021, the date of his felony conviction.

Based on the respondent’s convictions, admissions, and the parties’ stipulation, the panel found that the respondent committed professional misconduct when he engaged in conduct that violated a criminal law of a state or of the United States, an ordinance, or tribal law pursuant to MCR 2.615 in violation of MCR 9.104(5).

In accordance with the stipulation of the parties, the hearing panel ordered that the respondent be disbarred from the practice of law in Michigan. Total costs were assessed in the amount of $1,252.84.

DISBARMENT (BY CONSENT)

Anthony J. Semaan, P37589, Livonia, by the Attorney Discipline Board Tri-County Hearing Panel #1. Disbarment, effective Sept. 20, 2022.¹

The respondent and the grievance administrator filed a Stipulation for Consent Order of Discipline which was approved by the Attorney Grievance Commission and accepted by the hearing panel. The stipulation contained the respondent’s admission that he was convicted of embezzlement ($50,000 or more, but less than $100,000), a felony, in violation of MCL 750.1746 in People of the State of Michigan v. Anthony Joseph Semaan, Third Judicial Circuit Court, Case No. 21-00349801-FH. In accordance with MCR 9.120(B)(1), the respondent’s license to practice law in Michigan was automatically suspended effective Nov. 2, 2021, the date of his felony conviction.

Based on the respondent’s conviction, admissions, and the parties’ stipulation, the panel found that the respondent committed professional misconduct when he engaged in conduct that violated a criminal law of a state or of the United States, an ordinance, or tribal law pursuant to MCR 2.615 in violation of MCR 9.104(5).

In accordance with the stipulation of the parties, the hearing panel ordered that the respondent be disbarred from the practice of law in Michigan. Total costs were assessed in the amount of $817.12.

1. The respondent has been continuously suspended from the practice of law in Michigan since Nov. 2, 2021. Please see Notice of Automatic Interim Suspension issued Nov. 9, 2021.