The Michigan Attorney Discipline Board has ordered the disbarment of Sufi Y. Ahmad (P43206) of Pleasant Ridge, Michigan, effective August 23, 2025, following consent discipline proceedings involving extensive findings of professional misconduct across multiple client matters.
The disbarment was imposed pursuant to Michigan Court Rule 9.115, which governs attorney discipline proceedings.
Background: Consent Discipline and Consolidated Complaints
According to the notice, Ahmad and the Grievance Administrator filed a Stipulation for Consent Order of Discipline under MCR 9.115(F)(5), which was approved by the Attorney Grievance Commission and accepted by Tri-County Hearing Panel #16.
Ahmad entered no contest pleas to the factual allegations and professional misconduct allegations contained in two consolidated formal complaints, Case Nos. 23-67-GA and 25-10-GA.
The stipulated misconduct involved repeated failures across multiple legal matters, including failure to file legal actions on behalf of clients, mishandling of settlement proceeds, failure to seek appointment of a guardian ad litem for a minor in a probate matter, entering into settlements without client authorization, and repeated failures to respond to disciplinary investigations.
Misconduct Findings
Based on Ahmad’s no contest pleas and the parties’ stipulation, the hearing panel found violations of numerous provisions of the Michigan Rules of Professional Conduct and Michigan Court Rules, including:
- Neglect of legal matters, in violation of MRPC 1.1(c).
- Failure to seek the lawful objectives of clients, in violation of MRPC 1.2(a).
- Failure to act with diligence and promptness, in violation of MRPC 1.3.
- Failure to keep clients reasonably informed, in violation of MRPC 1.4(a).
- Failure to promptly deliver funds owed to clients or third parties, in violation of MRPC 1.15(b)(3).
- Failure to safeguard disputed property, in violation of MRPC 1.15(c).
- Failure to properly deposit client funds into trust accounts, in violation of MRPC 1.15(d).
- False statements to a tribunal or failure to correct false statements, in violation of MRPC 3.3(a)(1).
- Knowingly disobeying obligations under tribunal rules, in violation of MRPC 3.4(c).
- Violations of professional conduct standards, in violation of MRPC 8.4(a) and MCR 9.104(4).
- Conduct involving fraud, deceit, dishonesty, or misrepresentation, in violation of MRPC 8.4(b).
- Conduct prejudicial to the administration of justice, in violation of MRPC 8.4(c) and MCR 9.104(1).
- Conduct exposing the legal profession to obloquy, contempt, censure, or reproach, in violation of MCR 9.104(2).
- Conduct contrary to justice, ethics, honesty, or good morals, in violation of MCR 9.104(3).
- Failure to respond to lawful disciplinary inquiries, in violation of MRPC 8.1(a)(2).
- Failure to timely answer requests for investigation, in violation of MCR 9.104(7) and MCR 9.113(A) and (B)(2).
Panel Order and Sanctions
In accordance with the parties’ stipulation, the hearing panel ordered that:
- Ahmad be disbarred from the practice of law in Michigan, effective August 23, 2025.
- Ahmad pay total costs in the amount of $1,979.32.
The notice further reflects that Ahmad had been continuously suspended since May 2, 2025, following an earlier interim suspension issued for failure to appear.
What This Means
Disbarment is the most severe sanction available under Michigan’s attorney discipline system and is reserved for cases involving sustained, serious misconduct that undermines client trust and the integrity of the legal profession.
This case illustrates how repeated client neglect, mishandling of funds, dishonesty, and noncooperation with disciplinary authorities can culminate in permanent loss of the privilege to practice law.
