[ Home Page | Condensed Version | The Movie | The Book | News | Blogs | Feedback / Mail List ]

Act 128: The Commission Responds to My Appeal

I can't claim to fully understand the technicalities of what was going on – but judging from their response, the Michigan Attorney Grievance Commission seemed to regard itself as the defendant in this proceeding. In other words, I don't think I was trying to show the Court that Doug Sprinkle had committed an ethical violation – rather, I was trying to convince the Court that the Commission had made a mistake by dismissing my complaint. Or something like that.

Most of you reading this are probably thinking that I'm confused because I'm not a lawyer, and that this is a perfect example of why you shouldn't go to court without being represented by an attorney. The only problem I have with that is that, from what I can tell, filing an ethics complaint is something that you're supposed to be able to do without an attorney – and that, in fact, the procedure is supposed to be specifically designed for non-lawyers to pursue complaints against lawyers. But although that may be somewhat true up to a point, all pretense of non-legalism disappears the second you try to appeal the Commission's decision.

And so, on February 12, 2004, the Commission submitted this quite formal response to my appeal to the Michigan Supreme Court.

Display PDF Document in New Window
Download Free PDF Viewer

Next: I Reply to Doug's Response

[ Home Page | Condensed Version | The Movie | The Book | News | Blogs | Feedback / Mail List ]

©2007 Hank Mishkoff
All rights reserved.