The Michigan Attorney Discipline Board has issued a reprimand with condition against Terri T. Macklin (P38785) of Grand Rapids, Michigan, effective August 12, 2025, following findings of professional misconduct arising from a trust, estate planning, and probate court matter.
The discipline was imposed by consent pursuant to Michigan Court Rule 9.115, which governs attorney discipline proceedings.
Background: Consent Discipline and No Contest Pleas
According to the notice, Macklin and the Grievance Administrator entered into a Stipulation for Consent Order of Discipline under MCR 9.115(F)(5). The stipulation was approved by the Attorney Grievance Commission and accepted by Muskegon County Hearing Panel #3.
Macklin entered no contest pleas to factual allegations contained in paragraphs 1 through 52 of the formal complaint, which involved a client matter concerning a trust, estate planning, and subsequent probate proceedings. One factual allegation was excluded by agreement of the parties for purposes of the stipulation.
Macklin also entered a no contest plea to professional misconduct allegations set forth in paragraph 54 of the complaint, with one subparagraph dismissed by agreement.
Misconduct Findings
Based on Macklin’s no contest pleas and the parties’ stipulation, the hearing panel found that she committed professional misconduct, including:
- Entering into an agreement for, charging, and/or collecting an illegal or clearly excessive fee, in violation of MRPC 1.5(a).
- Failing to adequately communicate the basis or rate of a fee, in violation of MRPC 1.5(b).
- Entering or attempting to enter into a business transaction with a client or acquiring a pecuniary interest adverse to a client without required safeguards, in violation of MRPC 1.8(a).
- Knowingly making false statements of material fact or law to a tribunal or failing to correct false statements, in violation of MRPC 3.3(a)(1).
- Offering evidence known to be false, in violation of MRPC 3.3(a)(3).
- Violating or attempting to violate the Rules of Professional Conduct, in violation of MRPC 8.4(a).
- Engaging in conduct prejudicial to the administration of justice, in violation of MCR 9.104(1) and MRPC 8.4(c).
- Engaging in conduct exposing the legal profession or courts to obloquy, contempt, censure, or reproach, in violation of MCR 9.104(2).
- Engaging in conduct contrary to justice, ethics, honesty, or good morals, in violation of MCR 9.104(3).
- Engaging in conduct violating professional conduct standards adopted by the Michigan Supreme Court, in violation of MCR 9.104(4).
Panel Order and Sanctions
In accordance with the parties’ stipulation, the hearing panel ordered that:
- Macklin be reprimanded.
- Macklin comply with a condition relevant to the established misconduct.
- Macklin pay costs in the amount of $1,500.65.
No suspension was imposed.
What This Means
Matters involving trusts, estates, and probate carry heightened fiduciary duties and require strict adherence to fee rules, disclosure obligations, and candor toward tribunals. Even when resolved by consent, violations involving client transactions and tribunal integrity result in public discipline and conditions imposed by the disciplinary system.
