Attorney Thomas D. Noonan Suspended for Two Years, Ordered to Pay Restitution After Ethics Violations

Count One: Fabricated Settlement and Client Harm

In the first count, Noonan was retained to represent clients in a breach of contract and conversion case. Rather than fulfilling his professional responsibilities, he failed to respond to a critical motion, causing procedural damage to the case. More significantly, he drafted a fabricated settlement agreement. When investigators from the Attorney Grievance Commission inquired, Noonan admitted he had “dropped the ball” and acknowledged he had not been honest with his clients. His negligence ultimately resulted in a garnishment being entered against the clients he was hired to protect.

Count Two: Contraband Smuggling and Jailhouse Misconduct

In a separate matter, Noonan was representing a client who was incarcerated in a criminal case. Surveillance footage from a jail visit captured him smuggling cigarettes to the client. A subsequent investigation uncovered recorded jail phone calls in which Noonan and the client discussed bringing over-the-counter medications, cigarettes, and vape pens, including how to conceal the contraband. Those calls were recorded because Noonan had failed to register his number as a privileged attorney line with the facility. He later admitted to bringing six to eight cigarettes during the visit.

Violations Found

Sanctions and Restitution

The consent order imposed a two-year suspension effective June 30, 2025. Noonan is also required to pay $2,500 in restitution to the State Bar of Michigan’s Client Protection Fund, which had already compensated his defrauded clients on January 24, 2025. Costs of $1,142.62 were also assessed. The two-year suspension includes conditions tied to the nature of the misconduct.

The Noonan matter illustrates misconduct across distinct professional contexts — civil client neglect on one side, deliberate facilitation of contraband in a criminal representation on the other — resolved through a consent order rather than a contested proceeding. The no contest pleas to all allegations and the restitution obligation reflect the seriousness the hearing panel and Grievance Administrator assigned to the combined conduct.