In re Thav, 852 F. Supp. 2d 857

WD Mich suspended Thav for one year; reciprocal ED Mich suspension followed.
Thav seeks vacate/modify reciprocal discipline under LR 83.22(g)(2).
WD Mich panel recommended suspension after Show Cause and hearing based on Thav's conduct.
Thav appealed to the Sixth Circuit; Western District denied stay pending appeal.
This Court issued reciprocal suspension March 1, 2012; Thav moved to vacate/modify.
Court denies vacate/modify, keeping one-year reciprocal suspension.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Due process in reciprocal discipline	Thav claims denial due to new matters not raised initially	Panel did not base suspension on new matters; fair notice given	No due process violation; original notice and conduct supported suspension
Grave injustice in reciprocal discipline	Same discipline would cause grave injustice	Discipline reflected original misconduct and was not ill-fitted	No grave injustice; one-year suspension appropriate given misconduct
Difference in discipline between jurisdictions	Eastern District should impose different discipline	Reciprocal discipline typically identical; no basis for substantially different discipline	No substantial difference warranted; reciprocal discipline maintained

In the Matter of Ruffalo, 390 U.S. 544 (1968) (fair notice required in disciplinary proceedings)
In re Kramer, 282 F.3d 721 (9th Cir.2002) (grave injustice inquiry in reciprocal discipline)
In re Williams, 398 F.3d 116 (1st Cir.2005) (norm for reciprocal discipline to be substantially similar)
In re Fallin, 255 F.3d 195 (4th Cir.2001) (reciprocal discipline typically identical to original court)
In re Hoare, 155 F.3d 937 (8th Cir.1998) (identical discipline generally imposed on reciprocal basis)
In re Roman, 601 F.3d 189 (2nd Cir.2010) (rebuttable presumption of identical reciprocal discipline)
In re Attorney Discipline Matter, 98 F.3d 1082 (8th Cir.1996) (reciprocal review limited to due process, proof, or grave injustice)