Grievance Administrator v. Cote

Michigan Supreme Court

Grievance Administrator v. Cote

767 N.W.2d 449, 483 Mich. 1130

CourtMichigan Supreme Court

DecidedJuly 9, 2009

Docket138313

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 767 N.W.2d 449 (Grievance Administrator v. Cote) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Michigan Supreme Court primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Grievance Administrator v. Cote, 767 N.W.2d 449, 483 Mich. 1130 (Mich. 2009).

Pincite

Opinion

Summary Disposition July 9, 2009:

The application for leave to appeal is denied, because we are not persuaded that the questions presented should be reviewed by this Court. The application for leave to appeal as cross-appellant is also considered and, pursuant to MCR 7.302(H)(1), in lieu of granting leave to appeal, we vacate the March 6, 2009, order of the Attorney Disciplinary Board and we remand this case to the Attorney Disciplinary Board for consideration as on reconsideration granted. The board should reconsider its vacation of conditions A through D of the hearing panel’s June 25, 2008, order of suspension in light of the documentation provided by the Grievance Administrator. In all other respects, the application for leave to appeal as cross-appellant is denied, because we are not persuaded that the remaining question presented should be reviewed by this Court. ADB: 07-83-GA.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Summary Disposition July 9, 2009:

The application for leave to appeal is denied, because we are not persuaded that the questions presented should be reviewed by this Court. The application for leave to appeal as cross-appellant is also considered and, pursuant to MCR 7.302(H)(1), in lieu of granting leave to appeal, we vacate the March 6, 2009, order of the Attorney Disciplinary Board and we remand this case to the Attorney Disciplinary Board for consideration as on reconsideration granted. The board should reconsider its vacation of conditions A through D of the hearing panel’s June 25, 2008, order of suspension in light of the documentation provided by the Grievance Administrator. In all other respects, the application for leave to appeal as cross-appellant is denied, because we are not persuaded that the remaining question presented should be reviewed by this Court. ADB: 07-83-GA.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

767 N.W.2d 449, 483 Mich. 1130, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/grievance-administrator-v-cote-mich-2009.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack