Michigan Supreme Court Unit 'Admonishes' University Counsel Who Cleared Nassar
Because Kristine Moore’s admonishment does not constitute official discipline under the commission’s rules, her reprimand remains confidential but was filed in her permanent record.
August 16, 2019 at 05:25 PM
4 minute read
The Michigan Attorney Grievance Commission has “admonished” but not disciplined Kristine Moore, the in-house counsel at Michigan State University who in 2014 led a “deficient” investigation that wrongly cleared sports doctor Larry Nassar after a student’s sex abuse complaint.
Official disciplinary actions are made public by the commission, which is the investigative and prosecutorial arm of the Michigan Supreme Court for allegations of attorney misconduct. Because Moore’s admonishment does not constitute official discipline under the commission’s rules, her reprimand remains confidential but was filed in her permanent record.
A copy of the commission’s March 21 admonishment letter, marked personal and confidential, was obtained this week by reporter Megan Banta of the Lansing State Journal, who shared it Friday with Corporate Counsel.
The admonishment letter went to Moore and her attorney, Thomas Cranmer, who co-leads the litigation and dispute resolution group at Miller, Canfield, Paddock and Stone in Troy, Michigan.
Moore and Cranmer did not return messages Friday seeking comment. A Michigan State spokesperson declined comment. Moore was allowed 21 days to appeal the decision, but she did not.
The letter said Moore’s failings “were not without consequences because Nassar was permitted to return to work, and it has been reported that approximately 20 more women and girls were sexually assaulted by Nassar after [her] report and until he was finally terminated in September 2016.” Nassar has since been convicted of his crimes and was sentenced to what is effectively the rest of his life in prison.
In early 2014 Moore was an attorney and assistant director of the university’s office of inclusion, which investigated Title IX complaints. She was promoted to assistant general counsel at the end of her investigation of Nassar.
The commission said Moore’s probe was “deficient” in several areas and the failings violated federal regulations, including Title IX and the Clery Act. Its findings basically echoed the conclusions of a December 2018 report by the Michigan Attorney General’s Office that Moore’s failures “substantially influenced your incorrect conclusion that Nassar did not violate the sexual misconduct policy.”
The commission’s letter said Moore failed to:
- Consult neutral and objective medical experts with no ties to Nassar or the Michigan State College of Osteopathic Medicine.
- Accurately convey the details of the allegations to the three medical experts who were interviewed. The experts later said had they known the details, they would have answered Moore’s questions differently.
- Interview the female resident physician who was initially in the room with the patient until Nassar told her to leave.
- Provide the same version of her report to both the university and the complainant. The version given to her superiors raised a question about the continued risk of bad perceptions around Nassar’s actions.
- Provide a written notice of the appeals process to the complainant.
Moore’s investigatory report incorrectly concluded that Nassar’s treatment was an appropriate medical technique and not sexual in nature.
However, the commission concluded: “Nassar’s acts of telling the female resident physician to leave the room, massaging [the patient’s] breast under her shirt, massaging her vaginal area without gloves, failing to heed her request to stop, failing to stop until she physically removed his hands from her body, and becoming sexually aroused cannot seriously be considered an appropriate medical technique and not sexual in nature, especially in consideration” that the patient was seeking treatment for pain in her hip joint.
Moore remains in her job at the university. Meanwhile, since February 2018 two former Michigan State general counsel and a deputy general counsel promoted to acting general counsel were either ousted or departed under pressure because of the Nassar scandal and its political fallout.
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
NOT FOR REPRINT
© 2025 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.
You Might Like
View AllThe Met Hires GC of Elite University as Next Legal Chief
'Everything From A to Z': University GCs Tested by Legal, Financial, Societal Challenges
6 minute readFormer Rutgers Law School Dean Replaces Hoffman as University General Counsel on Interim Basis
4 minute readTrending Stories
- 1No Two Wildfires Alike: Lawyers Take Different Legal Strategies in California
- 2Poop-Themed Dog Toy OK as Parody, but Still Tarnished Jack Daniel’s Brand, Court Says
- 3Meet the New President of NY's Association of Trial Court Jurists
- 4Lawyers' Phones Are Ringing: What Should Employers Do If ICE Raids Their Business?
- 5Freshfields Hires Ex-SEC Corporate Finance Director in Silicon Valley
Who Got The Work
J. Brugh Lower of Gibbons has entered an appearance for industrial equipment supplier Devco Corporation in a pending trademark infringement lawsuit. The suit, accusing the defendant of selling knock-off Graco products, was filed Dec. 18 in New Jersey District Court by Rivkin Radler on behalf of Graco Inc. and Graco Minnesota. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Zahid N. Quraishi, is 3:24-cv-11294, Graco Inc. et al v. Devco Corporation.
Who Got The Work
Rebecca Maller-Stein and Kent A. Yalowitz of Arnold & Porter Kaye Scholer have entered their appearances for Hanaco Venture Capital and its executives, Lior Prosor and David Frankel, in a pending securities lawsuit. The action, filed on Dec. 24 in New York Southern District Court by Zell, Aron & Co. on behalf of Goldeneye Advisors, accuses the defendants of negligently and fraudulently managing the plaintiff's $1 million investment. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Vernon S. Broderick, is 1:24-cv-09918, Goldeneye Advisors, LLC v. Hanaco Venture Capital, Ltd. et al.
Who Got The Work
Attorneys from A&O Shearman has stepped in as defense counsel for Toronto-Dominion Bank and other defendants in a pending securities class action. The suit, filed Dec. 11 in New York Southern District Court by Bleichmar Fonti & Auld, accuses the defendants of concealing the bank's 'pervasive' deficiencies in regards to its compliance with the Bank Secrecy Act and the quality of its anti-money laundering controls. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Arun Subramanian, is 1:24-cv-09445, Gonzalez v. The Toronto-Dominion Bank et al.
Who Got The Work
Crown Castle International, a Pennsylvania company providing shared communications infrastructure, has turned to Luke D. Wolf of Gordon Rees Scully Mansukhani to fend off a pending breach-of-contract lawsuit. The court action, filed Nov. 25 in Michigan Eastern District Court by Hooper Hathaway PC on behalf of The Town Residences LLC, accuses Crown Castle of failing to transfer approximately $30,000 in utility payments from T-Mobile in breach of a roof-top lease and assignment agreement. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Susan K. Declercq, is 2:24-cv-13131, The Town Residences LLC v. T-Mobile US, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Wilfred P. Coronato and Daniel M. Schwartz of McCarter & English have stepped in as defense counsel to Electrolux Home Products Inc. in a pending product liability lawsuit. The court action, filed Nov. 26 in New York Eastern District Court by Poulos Lopiccolo PC and Nagel Rice LLP on behalf of David Stern, alleges that the defendant's refrigerators’ drawers and shelving repeatedly break and fall apart within months after purchase. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Joan M. Azrack, is 2:24-cv-08204, Stern v. Electrolux Home Products, Inc.
Featured Firms
Law Offices of Gary Martin Hays & Associates, P.C.
(470) 294-1674
Law Offices of Mark E. Salomone
(857) 444-6468
Smith & Hassler
(713) 739-1250