Changeflow GovPing Courts & Legal Aaron Spolin Disbarred, Michigan, Effective Apr...
Urgent Enforcement Amended Final

Aaron Spolin Disbarred, Michigan, Effective April 23

Favicon for www.adbmich.org MI Bar Attorney Discipline
Filed
Detected
Email

Summary

The Michigan Attorney Discipline Board issued a Notice of Disbarment for Aaron Spolin, P 85889, in Case No. 25-87-RD. The disbarment was imposed as reciprocal discipline pursuant to MCR 9.120(C), following Spolin's disbarment by the California Supreme Court on September 11, 2025. The Tri-County Hearing Panel #7 denied Spolin's request for additional briefing and found it would not be clearly inappropriate to impose comparable discipline in Michigan, issuing an order disbarring him on April 1, 2026, effective April 23, 2026. Costs were assessed in the amount of $1,510.73.

“On April 1, 2026, the panel issued an order disbarring respondent from the practice of law in Michigan, effective April 23, 2026.”

MI Bar , verbatim from source
Published by MI Bar on adbmich.org . Detected, standardized, and enriched by GovPing. Review our methodology and editorial standards .

About this source

GovPing monitors MI Bar Attorney Discipline for new courts & legal regulatory changes. Every update since tracking began is archived, classified, and available as free RSS or email alerts — 7 changes logged to date.

What changed

The Michigan Attorney Discipline Board imposed reciprocal disbarment on attorney Aaron Spolin following his disbarment by the California State Bar. The panel denied Spolin's request for additional briefing, finding that he was afforded due process in the California proceedings and that comparable discipline was not clearly inappropriate. The disbarment is effective April 23, 2026.

Legal professionals admitted in Michigan should be aware that disciplinary action taken in other jurisdictions may result in reciprocal discipline through MCR 9.120(C) proceedings. Attorneys subject to out-of-state disciplinary orders should monitor reciprocal discipline proceedings and meet any deadlines for raising objections.

What to do next

  1. Costs were assessed in the amount of $1,510.73.

Archived snapshot

Apr 24, 2026

GovPing captured this document from the original source. If the source has since changed or been removed, this is the text as it existed at that time.

STATE OF MICHIGAN MEMBERS WENDY A. NEELEY EXECUTIVE DIRECTORALAN GERSHELATTORNEY DISCIPLINE BOARD -- CHAIRPERSON JOHN K. BURGESSPETER A. SMIT DEPUTY DIRECTOR -- VICE-CHAIRPERSON KAREN M. DALEYREV. DR. LOUIS J. PRUES ASSOCIATE COUNSEL -- SECRETARY SHERRY MIFSUDLINDA M. ORLANS OFFICE ADMINISTRATOR --JASON M. TURKISH OWEN R. MONTGOMERYANDREAS SIDIROPOULOS, MD CASE MANAGER --KATIE STANLEY JODIE GROHTISH VINCENT CASE MANAGER --KAMILIA K. LANDRUM JULIE M. LOISELLE RECEPTIONIST/SECRETARY --333 WEST FORT STREET, SUITE 1700DETROIT, MICHIGAN 48226-3147 www.adbmich.org PHONE: 313-963-5553 NOTICE OF DISBARMENT Case No. 25-87-RD Notice Issued: April 23, 2026 Aaron Spolin, P 85889, Los Angeles, California Suspension - Disbarment, Effective April 23, 2026 In a reciprocal discipline proceeding filed pursuant to MCR 9.120(C), the Grievance Administrator filed a certified copy of an order from the California Supreme Court issued September 11, 2025, disbarring respondent from the practice of law, effective September 11, 2025, in the matter titled In re Aaron Spolin, Case Nos. SBC-24-O-30656; SBC-24-O-30844; S292012. An order regarding imposition of reciprocal discipline was issued by the Board and served on the parties on October 22, 2025, ordering the parties to inform the Board in writing, within 21 days from service of the order, (i) of any objection to the imposition of comparable discipline in Michigan based on the grounds set forth in MCR 9.120(C)(1), and (ii) whether a hearing was requested. On November 19, 2025, respondent filed a letter of objection with the Board, and a request to submit additional briefing on the issue. Upon respondent's objection, this matter was assigned to Tri-County Hearing Panel #7 for disposition, pursuant to MCR 9.120(C)(3). The panel denied respondent's request for additional briefing, finding that respondent was afforded due process in the disciplinary proceedings conducted by the California State Bar, and that it would not be clearly inappropriate to impose comparable discipline in Michigan. On April 1, 2026, the panel issued an order disbarring respondent from the practice of law in Michigan, effective April 23, 2026. Costs were assessed in the amount of $1,510.73.

Named provisions

MCR 9.120(C) MCR 9.120(C)(1) MCR 9.120(C)(3)

Get daily alerts for MI Bar Attorney Discipline

Daily digest delivered to your inbox.

Free. Unsubscribe anytime.

About this page

What is GovPing?

Every important government, regulator, and court update from around the world. One place. Real-time. Free. Our mission

What's from the agency?

Source document text, dates, docket IDs, and authority are extracted directly from MI Bar.

What's AI-generated?

The summary, classification, recommended actions, deadlines, and penalty information are AI-generated from the original text and may contain errors. Always verify against the source document.

Last updated

Classification

Agency
MI Bar
Filed
April 23rd, 2026
Compliance deadline
April 23rd, 2026 (1 days ago)
Instrument
Enforcement
Branch
Executive
Legal weight
Binding
Stage
Final
Change scope
Substantive
Docket
25-87-RD SBC-24-O-30656 SBC-24-O-30844 S292012

Who this affects

Applies to
Legal professionals
Industry sector
5411 Legal Services
Activity scope
Professional licensing Attorney discipline Reciprocal discipline
Geographic scope
US-MI US-MI

Taxonomy

Primary area
Judicial Administration
Operational domain
Legal
Topics
Employment & Labor Consumer Protection

Get alerts for this source

We'll email you when MI Bar Attorney Discipline publishes new changes.

Free. Unsubscribe anytime.

You're subscribed!