Gursten v. Attorney Grievance Comm'n

Michigan Supreme Court

Gursten v. Attorney Grievance Comm'n

920 N.W.2d 580

CourtMichigan Supreme Court

DecidedDecember 21, 2018

DocketSC: 158137

StatusPublished

This text of 920 N.W.2d 580 (Gursten v. Attorney Grievance Comm'n) 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

Gursten v. Attorney Grievance Comm'n, 920 N.W.2d 580 (Mich. 2018).

Pincite

Opinion

On order of the Court, the complaint for superintending control is considered, and relief is DENIED, because the Court is *581not persuaded that it should grant the requested relief.

McCormack, J., did not participate because she may have independent knowledge regarding this case.

Bernstein, J., did not participate because he has a family member with an interest that could be affected by the proceeding.

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

On order of the Court, the complaint for superintending control is considered, and relief is DENIED, because the Court is *581not persuaded that it should grant the requested relief.

McCormack, J., did not participate because she may have independent knowledge regarding this case.

Bernstein, J., did not participate because he has a family member with an interest that could be affected by the proceeding.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

920 N.W.2d 580, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/gursten-v-attorney-grievance-commn-mich-2018.