Summary
The Supreme Court of Ohio imposed an indefinite suspension on attorney Karen Kaye Meade for failing to cooperate with multiple disciplinary investigations, neglecting an immigration matter, and failing to deliver a former client's file. Reinstatement was conditioned on proof of satisfactory mental-health treatment and ability to practice competently and ethically, followed by one year of monitored probation.
Topics
Practice areas
Questions Presented
- Whether respondent committed professional misconduct by failing to cooperate with disciplinary investigations.
- Whether respondent committed professional misconduct by failing to act with reasonable diligence and promptness in representing an immigration client.
- Whether respondent committed professional misconduct by failing to deliver the former client's file and by engaging in conduct prejudicial to the administration of justice.
- What sanction is appropriate for the established misconduct.
Holdings
- By failing to appear for a deposition and failing to reschedule it, respondent violated Prof.Cond.R. 8.4(h) and Gov.Bar R. V(4)(G).
- Respondent violated Prof.Cond.R. 1.3 by failing to act with reasonable diligence and promptness when she missed the deadline to appeal the client's removal order.
- Respondent violated Prof.Cond.R. 1.16(d) and 8.4(d) by failing to provide the former client's file to the client or new counsel and by engaging in conduct prejudicial to the administration of justice.
- An indefinite suspension from the practice of law, with reinstatement conditioned on specified mental-health treatment and fitness evidence and followed by one year of monitored probation, was appropriate.
Key quotations
“Accordingly, Karen Kaye Meade is indefinitely suspended from the practice of law in the state of Ohio.” (¶ 22)
“Any petition for reinstatement must include proof from respondent’s treating medical professionals and OLAP that any mental-health issues have been resolved, that she has followed all treatment recommendations, and that she is able to return to the competent, ethical, and professional practice of law.” (¶ 22)
Factual background
Meade failed to cooperate with multiple disciplinary investigations, including by failing to appear for a deposition and failing to respond to letters of inquiry. In an immigration matter, she accepted $2,500 to appeal a client's removal order but missed the filing deadline by one day, resulting in dismissal of the appeal. After the client obtained new counsel, Meade failed to provide the client's file or refund the fee. The record also described conduct and statements that raised concerns about Meade's mental health and competency.
Procedural history
Disciplinary Counsel filed a six-count complaint alleging misconduct involving client representation, termination of representation, and failure to respond to disciplinary grievances. After service was accepted on respondent's behalf, respondent failed to participate, and a master commissioner granted default, found misconduct, and recommended an indefinite suspension with conditions for reinstatement. The board adopted the recommendation, and the Supreme Court of Ohio adopted the board's findings and sanction.