Gregory Rohl Disbarred: $659,821 Restitution Over Lilliana Kerr Wrongful-Death Settlement

Gregory Rohl was disbarred by consent effective October 1, 2026, when Michigan's Attorney Discipline Board accepted his no contest plea to charges that he misappropriated and failed to distribute the court-ordered shares of a $2.5 million wrongful-death settlement he obtained for the family of Lilliana Kerr, the preschooler killed by a falling cafeteria table at a Dearborn Heights Head Start program in 2017. Tri-County Hearing Panel #101 ordered him to pay $659,821.44 in restitution plus $1,446.14 in costs, a figure that roughly tracks the money the child's surviving siblings say never reached the accounts set up for them.

The notice was issued on October 1, but the story broke publicly on October 22 and 23, when WDIV Local 4, WXYZ and The Detroit News reported that Tabatha Kerr, Lilliana's mother and Rohl's client, was still trying to find out where the money went. The case is In the Matter of Gregory J. Rohl, No. 26-47-GA. For the plaintiffs' bar, it is a textbook trust-account failure on the most sensitive kind of recovery a personal injury lawyer handles: a death claim whose proceeds a court has already divided among a dead child's family, including minors.

Why was Gregory Rohl disbarred?

Gregory Rohl was disbarred because he admitted, through a no contest plea, every factual allegation and every misconduct charge in a three-count formal complaint accusing him of misappropriating wrongful-death settlement money held in his IOLTA account and failing to release the children's shares despite court orders. The resolution was a stipulated consent order: the Grievance Administrator and Rohl agreed on the sanction, the Attorney Grievance Commission approved it, and the hearing panel accepted it.

According to the Board's notice, as reproduced by ALABnews and summarized by Hoodline and The Detroit News, the panel found that Rohl:

• neglected a legal matter entrusted to him;
• failed to act with reasonable diligence and promptness;
• failed to keep his client reasonably informed;
• failed to promptly deliver funds that a client or third person was entitled to receive;
• knowingly disobeyed an obligation under the rules of a tribunal;
• made a false statement of material fact in connection with a disciplinary matter;
• engaged in conduct involving dishonesty, fraud, deceit or misrepresentation; and
• engaged in conduct prejudicial to the proper administration of justice.

Any one of the trust-account findings would be serious. The combination of misappropriation, disobedience of a court's distribution order and a false statement to disciplinary authorities is the profile Michigan treats as warranting disbarment, which is why the parties stipulated to the maximum sanction rather than a suspension.

How much does Gregory Rohl have to pay in restitution?

Gregory Rohl must pay $659,821.44 in restitution, plus $1,446.14 in disciplinary costs, for a combined $661,267.58. Several outlets rounded the figure to "more than $600,000" or "nearly $660,000"; the precise restitution number in the notice is $659,821.44.

Restitution in a Michigan disciplinary order is a condition attached to the sanction. It matters later, because a disbarred lawyer who petitions for reinstatement must show compliance with the discipline order, and unpaid restitution is a practical bar to reinstatement. It is not, by itself, a civil judgment the family can execute on, which is why the separate recovery routes discussed below still matter.

What happened to Lilliana Kerr?

Lilliana Kerr died on January 20, 2017, when a cafeteria table that WDIV described as weighing about 350 pounds fell from its wall casing and struck her at the Head Start program housed at St. Albert the Great church and school in Dearborn Heights. Most outlets report she was 3; The Detroit News describes her as 2 and the table as a folding lunch table. Her death was ruled accidental and no criminal charges were filed over it.

In April 2017, Rohl, representing Tabatha Kerr, filed a $10 million wrongful death lawsuit in Wayne County against the Archdiocese of Detroit, the Wayne Metropolitan Community Action Agency, which ran the Head Start program, and St. Albert the Great Church, according to contemporaneous reports from WDIV and CBS Detroit. The case later resolved for $2.5 million. The settlement date and the allocation among family members have not been published.

Kerr became a public advocate after her daughter's death. Bills known as "Lilliana's Law," including House Bill 4739 in the 2019-2020 session and House Bill 4167 in 2021-2022, both sponsored by then-Representative Ryan Berman, proposed annual health and safety inspections of school buildings. A later package, House Bills 5530 and 5531, proposed a death and injury registry for school facilities. None of those measures is reported to have become law.

Timeline of the Rohl case

Date	Event
December 1, 2016	Rohl's 30-day consent suspension takes effect, after convictions for disorderly conduct and malicious use of telecommunications services
January 20, 2017	Lilliana Kerr killed by a falling cafeteria table at a Dearborn Heights Head Start program
April 2017	Rohl files a $10 million wrongful death suit in Wayne County for Tabatha Kerr
2021-2023	Rohl is among the lawyers sanctioned in King v. Whitmer; the Sixth Circuit affirms in part and reverses in part on June 23, 2023
Dec. 27, 2023 / Jan. 2, 2024	Reprimand by consent for failing to supervise staff, which delayed a client's settlement funds for five years
Undisclosed	$2.5 million settlement deposited in Rohl's IOLTA; court orders the distribution of shares, including to Lilliana's siblings
2026	Grievance Administrator files a three-count formal complaint, No. 26-47-GA
October 1, 2026	Disbarment by consent takes effect; Board issues notice; restitution of $659,821.44 ordered
October 2, 2026	Eastern District of Michigan opens miscellaneous matter No. 2:2026mc51231 on the disbarment
October 22-23, 2026	WDIV, WXYZ and The Detroit News report the family never received the children's shares

What does a no contest plea mean in a Michigan attorney discipline case?

A no contest plea in a Michigan attorney discipline case means the lawyer does not admit the allegations but agrees they may be treated as established for purposes of the disciplinary proceeding, so the panel can enter findings and a sanction without a contested hearing. In Rohl's case, the plea covered all factual allegations and all misconduct charges in the complaint.

Consent discipline in Michigan runs through the stipulation procedure in Michigan Court Rule 9.115(F)(5), which lets the respondent and the Grievance Administrator submit an agreed plea and sanction once the Attorney Grievance Commission approves it. The hearing panel may accept or reject the stipulation; it cannot rewrite it. Two consequences follow. First, a no contest plea is not a criminal conviction and is generally not usable against him in later litigation the way a guilty plea might be. Second, the plea does not stop Rohl from telling the press, as he has, that he never knowingly took client funds. The disciplinary record and the public narrative can diverge, and here they do.

What did Gregory Rohl say about the missing settlement money?

Gregory Rohl told WDIV that he never knowingly took client money, that the funds never left his trust account, and that his "now deceased partner and office manager," whom he trusted and who had assumed control of the firm, was among those responsible for the loss, along with a probate attorney. He also said he was ultimately responsible because the trust account was in his name, and that he is at home recovering from a stroke. WDIV reported that his firm's website had been taken down; WXYZ said it had not received a response before publication.

Rohl's account cannot be squared easily with the stipulated findings. A plea that accepts a "dishonest conduct" charge and a false statement to disciplinary authorities goes beyond negligent supervision. And the claim that the money never left the trust account sits awkwardly with a restitution order of nearly $660,000: if the funds were still in trust, the distribution order could have been honored. Neither the identity of the deceased partner nor that of the probate attorney has been published, and no independent account supports Rohl's attribution of blame.

Has Gregory Rohl been disciplined before?

Yes. The 2026 disbarment is the third disciplinary matter on Rohl's Michigan record, and the second involving settlement money held in trust.

Year	Matter	Sanction	Basis
2016	Consent order	30-day suspension, effective December 1, 2016	Convictions for disorderly conduct and malicious use of telecommunications services
2023-2024	Consent order	Reprimand (Bar Journal lists effective December 27, 2023; reported January 2, 2024)	Failure to supervise office staff, which left a client's settlement funds in trust for five years until she filed a request for investigation
2026	No. 26-47-GA, consent order	Disbarment effective October 1, 2026; $659,821.44 restitution; $1,446.14 costs	Misappropriation and failure to distribute court-ordered wrongful-death shares; false statement in a disciplinary matter

Separately, Rohl was one of the attorneys who signed the post-2020-election complaint in King v. Whitmer in the Eastern District of Michigan. The district court sanctioned the plaintiffs' lawyers under Rule 11, 28 U.S.C. § 1927 and its inherent authority and referred them to their bars. On June 23, 2023, the Sixth Circuit, in No. 21-1786, upheld the Rule 11 sanctions tied to specific misrepresentations and the § 1927 sanctions, while reversing the inherent-authority sanctions. Michigan Attorney General Dana Nessel, Governor Gretchen Whitmer and Secretary of State Jocelyn Benson also filed grievances seeking discipline of the lawyers. Nothing in the 2026 notice ties the disbarment to that litigation.

The 2024 reprimand is the more telling precedent. It put Rohl on notice, more than two years before the 2026 complaint, that a settlement balance had sat undistributed in his trust account because of office supervision failures. The same defense, that staff or a partner controlled the money, is the one he is offering now.

How Michigan wrongful-death settlement money is supposed to move

Michigan does not let a lawyer or personal representative decide alone how wrongful-death money is divided. Under MCL 600.2922, the court must hold a hearing and approve both the settlement and the distribution of proceeds among the persons entitled to share, typically the spouse, children, parents, siblings and other relatives listed in the statute. When none of the beneficiaries is a minor or legally incapacitated, the parties may stipulate to a distribution order; when, as here, minors are involved, the stipulation shortcut is not available and the court must decide the allocation after notice and hearing, according to the Michigan Judicial Institute's wrongful death settlement checklist. The court must also decide whether any portion is attributable to the decedent's conscious pain and suffering, because that part belongs to the estate.

The practical result is a court order that says, to the dollar, how much each beneficiary receives and, for minors, how the share must be held. Kerr told reporters that money was supposed to go into accounts established for Lilliana's surviving siblings and that years passed without it ever appearing. That is why the panel's finding that Rohl "knowingly disobeyed an obligation under the rules of a tribunal" matters: the shares were not discretionary. They were fixed by order, and the lawyer holding the money had a non-delegable duty under Michigan Rule of Professional Conduct 1.15 to safeguard and promptly deliver it to the people the court named. The firm's Contingency Fee and costs come off the top only as the court approves; nothing in the distribution allows a lawyer to hold minors' money indefinitely.

Can the Kerr family get the money back?

The Kerr family has three main routes, and none is guaranteed to make the children whole: the restitution order, the State Bar of Michigan's Client Protection Fund, and a civil suit against Rohl, his firm, and anyone else who handled the money.

The Client Protection Fund reimburses clients who lose money or property through a Michigan lawyer's dishonest conduct. According to the State Bar's published rules and history, it pays up to $150,000 per claimant and no more than $375,000 in total to all claimants for the dishonest acts of one lawyer, or a group of lawyers, in the same course of conduct, prorating approved claims if the cap is exceeded. A claim must be filed within one year after the relevant Attorney Grievance Commission or Attorney Discipline Board determination. The fund does not pay for mere negligence, fee disputes, interest or consequential losses.

Recovery route	What it can deliver	Main limit
Disciplinary restitution	$659,821.44 ordered	Collection depends on Rohl's assets; enforced mainly through the reinstatement process
Client Protection Fund	Up to $150,000 per claimant	$375,000 aggregate cap for one lawyer's course of conduct; one-year filing window; dishonest conduct only
Civil suit (conversion, breach of fiduciary duty, legal malpractice)	Full loss plus potentially other damages	Statute of Limitations and Rohl's ability to pay; malpractice insurance often excludes intentional acts
Claims against others who handled funds	Depends on facts	Requires proof of their role; the partner Rohl blames is deceased

Because several siblings each hold a separate court-ordered share, each may qualify as a separate claimant with the fund, but the $375,000 aggregate ceiling would still fall well below the $659,821.44 at issue. The one-year clock from the October 1 determination is the deadline to watch.

Is Gregory Rohl facing criminal charges?

No criminal charges against Gregory Rohl over the Kerr settlement have been reported as of October 25, 2026. Kerr told WDIV that she has been contacting law enforcement and prosecutors since learning of the disbarment, but no agency has announced an investigation, and the disciplinary finding is not a criminal conviction. Misappropriation of client trust funds can support state embezzlement or false-pretenses charges, so a referral remains possible, but the no contest plea in the disciplinary case does not establish criminal guilt.

Can a disbarred lawyer in Michigan practice law again?

A disbarred Michigan lawyer can petition for reinstatement, but not for at least five years after the disbarment, and only by proving eligibility by clear and convincing evidence under MCR 9.123(B) and MCR 9.124. For Rohl, the earliest petition date would be October 1, 2031. The petitioner must show, among other things, a good-faith desire to return to practice, compliance with the discipline order, and that the lawyer can safely be recommended to the public and the courts. Hearing panels routinely require repayment of restitution and of any Client Protection Fund payouts as a condition. Petitions are published, and interested persons, including former clients, may appear and oppose.

In the meantime, MCR 9.119 requires a disbarred lawyer to notify active clients in writing, notify tribunals and opposing parties in pending matters, stop holding out as a lawyer, and file an affidavit of compliance. The federal miscellaneous docket opened in the Eastern District of Michigan on October 2, 2026, No. 2:2026mc51231, reflects the parallel effect on Rohl's admission to practice in that court.

The trust-account rules Michigan is rewriting

The disbarment lands while the Michigan Supreme Court is considering a rewrite of the state's trust-account rules. In ADM File No. 2022-19, the court on June 30, 2026 issued an order publishing proposed amendments to MRPC 1.5, 1.15 and 1.15A and proposed new MRPC 1.15B and 1.15C, a package the State Bar has described as modernizing rules it called convoluted and difficult to understand. The proposals aim to clarify a lawyer's duties when safekeeping client or third-person property and managing trust accounts.

The Rohl matter is the scenario such rules target: a large balance belonging to multiple third-party beneficiaries, distribution governed by court order, and a lawyer who says others in the office controlled the account. Clearer record-keeping, reconciliation and supervision duties would not prevent deliberate theft, but they make a "my partner did it" defense harder to sustain, because the account-holder's personal monitoring obligation becomes explicit.

What it means for personal injury firms

The Rohl disbarment is a reminder that the most dangerous moment in a wrongful-death or minor-settlement case is not trial but the months after the check clears. Concretely:

• For firm owners: The name on the IOLTA is the name on the grievance. Delegating reconciliation to an office manager or partner does not delegate the MRPC 1.15 duty, and a prior supervision reprimand, as Rohl had, turns a later shortfall into a dishonesty case.
• For wrongful-death and minor-settlement practices: Treat the distribution order as a checklist. Each beneficiary's share, each protected account and each deadline should be tied to a closing letter and a bank confirmation, and the file should show the date each minor's share was funded.
• For co-counsel and referring lawyers: A referral fee or co-counsel role carries an interest in confirming that the distribution happened. Asking for proof of funding of protected accounts is ordinary diligence, not distrust.
• For probate counsel: Rohl's attempt to share blame with a probate attorney shows how the hand-off between the tort lawyer and the conservatorship or estate lawyer can become a gap. Written allocation of who moves which dollars, and when, closes it.
• For lienholders and settlement planners: Medical Lien holders, structured-settlement providers and administrators paid from the same proceeds are third persons under the rule; delays in their payment are often the first visible symptom of a trust problem.
• For clients and families: The Client Protection Fund window is one year from the disciplinary determination, so a claim premised on this order should be calculated from October 1, 2026.

The case also feeds a broader political argument. Tort-reform advocates have pressed state legislatures this year over plaintiffs'-firm conduct, from case running in Georgia to staged-crash prosecutions in Louisiana. A disbarment over a dead child's settlement will be cited in those debates, which is one reason state bars are under pressure to show that trust-account enforcement works before money disappears rather than years after.

FAQ

Why was Gregory Rohl disbarred?

He pleaded no contest to a three-count complaint alleging he misappropriated and failed to distribute court-ordered shares of a $2.5 million wrongful-death settlement in his IOLTA account and made a false statement in the disciplinary matter. The disbarment by consent took effect October 1, 2026.

How much does Gregory Rohl have to pay?

The hearing panel ordered $659,821.44 in restitution and $1,446.14 in costs, for a total of $661,267.58.

Who was the client in the Rohl disbarment case?

Tabatha Kerr, mother of Lilliana Kerr, who died on January 20, 2017 when a cafeteria table fell on her at a Head Start program at St. Albert the Great in Dearborn Heights. The unpaid money was the court-ordered share for Lilliana's surviving siblings.

Has Gregory Rohl been charged with a crime over the settlement?

No charges have been reported as of October 25, 2026. Kerr says she has contacted authorities, and the no contest plea in the discipline case is not a criminal conviction.

Can the Kerr children recover through the Client Protection Fund?

They may apply. The State Bar of Michigan's fund pays up to $150,000 per claimant and $375,000 in total for one lawyer's course of conduct, for dishonest conduct only, and claims must be filed within one year of the disciplinary determination.

When could Gregory Rohl seek reinstatement?

No earlier than five years after disbarment, so October 1, 2031 at the earliest, and only by proving eligibility by clear and convincing evidence, which in practice requires paying the restitution ordered.