April 3, 2001



00-22



Proposed Amendment of Rule
9.104 of the Michigan
Court Rules and Rule 8.1
of the Michigan Rules of
Professional Conduct
____________________________


          On order of the Court, this is to advise that the Court
is considering an amendment of Rule 9.104 of the Michigan Court
Rules and Rule 8.1 of the Michigan Rules of Professional
Conduct.  Before determining whether the proposal should be
adopted, changed before adoption, or rejected, this notice is
given to afford any interested person the opportunity to comment
on the form or the merits of the proposal.  We welcome the views
of all who wish to address the proposal or who wish to suggest
alternatives.  Before adoption or rejection, this proposal will
be considered at a public hearing by the Court.  The Clerk of
the Court will publish a schedule of future public hearings.

          Publication of this proposal does not mean that the
Court will issue an order on the subject, nor does it imply
probable adoption of the proposal in its present form.

   [The present language would be amended as indicated below.]

Rule 9.104     Grounds for Discipline in General; Adjudication
Elsewhere

(A)     The following acts or omissions by an attorney,
individually or in concert with another person, are misconduct
and grounds for discipline, whether or not occurring in the
course of an attorney-client relationship:

     (1)  conduct prejudicial to the proper administration of
justice;

     (2)  conduct that exposes the legal profession or the courts
to obloquy, contempt, censure, or reproach;

     (3)  conduct that is contrary to justice, ethics, honesty,
or good morals;

     (4)  conduct that violates the standards or rules of
professional responsibility adopted by the Supreme Court;

     (5)  conduct that violates a criminal law of a state or of
the United States;

     (6)  knowing misrepresentation of any facts or circumstances
surrounding a request for investigation or complaint;

     (7)  failure to answer a request for investigation or
complaint in conformity with MCR 9.113 and 9.115(D);

     (8)  contempt of the board or a hearing panel; or

     (9)  violation of an order of discipline.

(B)     Proof of an adjudication of misconduct in a
disciplinary proceeding by another state or a United States
court is conclusive proof of misconduct in a disciplinary
proceeding in Michigan.  The only issues to be addressed in the
Michigan proceeding are whether the respondent was afforded due
process of law in the course of the original proceedings and
whether imposition of identical discipline in Michigan would be
clearly inappropriate.

(C)     It is misconduct and a ground for discipline
for an attorney,  while an applicant for admission to the bar,
to have engaged in activities reserved to licensed lawyers.




RULE 8.1 BAR ADMISSION AND DISCIPLINARY MATTERS

(a)     An applicant for admission to the bar, or a lawyer
in connection with a bar admission application or in connection
with a disciplinary matter, shall not:

     [(a)](1)   knowingly make a false statement of
material fact;  or

     [(b)](2)   fail to disclose a fact necessary
to correct a misapprehension known by the person to have arisen
in the matter, or knowingly fail to respond to a lawful demand
for information from an admissions or disciplinary authority,
except that this rule does not require disclosure of information
protected by Rule 1.6.

(b)     An applicant for admission to the bar has a
continuing obligation, until the date of admission, to inform
the Standing Committee on Character and Fitness, in writing, if
any answers in the applicant's Affidavit of Personal History
change or cease to be true.


          Staff Comment:  The proposed amendment of MCR
9.104 and MRPC 8.1 would expand the grounds for discipline to
include the unauthorized practice of law before admission to the
Bar.

The staff comment is published only for the benefit of the bench
and Bar and is not an authoritative construction by the Court. 


          _____________________________________________

                    Publication of this proposal does not mean
          that the Court will issue an order on the
          subject, nor does it imply probable adoption
          in its present form.  Timely comments will
          be substantively considered, and your
          assistance is appreciated by the Court.     
                     
          _____________________________________________


          A copy of this order will be given to the secretary of
the State Bar and to the State Court Administrator so that they
can make the notifications specified in MCR 1.201.  Comments on
this proposal may be sent to the Supreme Court clerk in writing
or electronically by July 1, 2001.  P.O. Box 30052, Lansing, MI
48909, or MSC_clerk@jud.state.mi.us.  When filing a comment,
please refer to our file No. 00-22.