Skip to main content
discipline 3 October 2026
‹ Browse decisions

Decision record

Michael John Little

JurisdictionEngland & Wales
BodySolicitors Disciplinary Tribunal (SDT)
Professionsolicitor
Case number12498/2023
Date02/04/2024
OutcomeStrike off

Allegation / charges

Code of Conduct 2007, Code of Conduct 2011, Criminal Convictions, Dishonesty, Lack of Integrity, SRA Principles 2011

Findings — machine-extracted (anthropic-batch:claude-opus-4-8); verify against the decision

SanctionStrike Off
CostsGBP 11,393
Dishonesty foundYes

Michael John Little, a dual-qualified solicitor and barrister, was convicted in 2018 in the US District Court (Southern District of New York) on 19 counts including conspiracy to defraud the IRS, corruptly obstructing the IRS, and aiding and assisting preparation of false IRS forms, arising from helping the Seggerman family conceal offshore assets and evade tax. The SDT rejected his applications to stay/adjourn proceedings and challenges to jurisdiction, and proceeded in his absence. The Tribunal found allegations 1.1 and 1.2 proved, including breaches of Principles 2 and 6 and Rules 1.02/1.06, and made express findings of dishonesty under the Ivey test in relation to both allegations (including misleading correspondence sent on his solicitor's letterhead described by the trial judge as a 'whopper of a lie'). Finding no exceptional circumstances, the Tribunal struck him off the Roll and ordered costs of £11,393.25.

Duties found breached:

Aggravating factors:

  • Conduct was dishonest
  • Involved commission of serious criminal offences (US conviction on 19 counts including conspiracy to defraud the IRS)
  • Continued over a period of years (2001-2012)
  • Deliberate and carefully planned conduct
  • Used his professional status as a solicitor to lend credibility to false representations
  • Material breach of professional obligations he would have known about

Mitigating factors:

  • No previous disciplinary findings before the Tribunal
  • Age of the respondent (74)
  • Under stress with various proceedings ongoing
  • No evidence of misconduct before or since the convictions
  • Mitigating factors identified by the sentencing Judge (sense of honour/duty to deceased business associate)
  • Convictions related to conduct concerning one family, not wider criminality

Codes & rules applied

Duties engaged

Documents

Source: https://solicitorstribunal.org.uk/case/12498/