State ex rel. Oklahoma Bar Association v. Brooking

Brooking, 2018 OK 8 (Okla. 2018) · Supreme Court of Oklahoma · January 30, 2018 · No. SCBD-6496

Summary

The Oklahoma Supreme Court reviewed an attorney-discipline proceeding involving Meagan Elaine Brooking's intentional backdating of a court clerk's filing stamp. The Court found violations of the Oklahoma Rules of Professional Conduct and suspended Brooking from practicing law for sixty days, ordering her to pay proceeding costs.

Court
Supreme Court of Oklahoma
Writing for the Court
Combs, C.J.; Gurich, V.C.J.; Winchester, J.; Edmondson, J.; Colbert, J.; Reif, J.; Wyrick, J.; Kauger, J.
Jurisdiction
Oklahoma
Decision date
January 30, 2018
Docket number
SCBD-6496
Procedural posture
Attorney disciplinary proceeding initiated by the Oklahoma Bar Association under Rule 6 of the Rules Governing Disciplinary Proceedings. After a Professional Responsibility Tribunal recommended suspension for up to six months, the Oklahoma Supreme Court conducted de novo review and imposed a sixty-day suspension.
Standard of review
De novo review of the record, including independent determination of whether misconduct occurred and the appropriate discipline.
Precedential value
Published Oklahoma Supreme Court opinion; the opinion text initially stated that it had not yet been released for publication and was subject to revision or withdrawal.
Parties
State of Oklahoma ex rel. Oklahoma Bar Association v. Meagan Elaine Brooking
Disposition
other

Topics

appellate procedureremediesadministrative law

Practice areas

legal ethicsattorney disciplineprofessional responsibilityappellate procedure

Questions Presented

  1. Whether Brooking engaged in professional misconduct by backdating an official court filing stamp to make a late pleading appear timely.
  2. Whether the conduct violated Rules 1.1, 1.3, 3.3, and 8.4 of the Oklahoma Rules of Professional Conduct.
  3. What discipline was appropriate in light of the misconduct and the mitigating circumstances.

Holdings

  1. Brooking engaged in professional misconduct by intentionally turning back the date on the court clerk's filing stamp to make a pleading submitted on April 19, 2017, appear to have been filed on April 15, 2017.
  2. Intentionally backdating the court clerk's filing stamp for the purpose of deceiving the court and the other party violated Rule 8.4 of the Oklahoma Rules of Professional Conduct, even absent an asserted bad motive or evil intent.
  3. A sixty-day suspension from the practice of law, together with payment of the proceeding's costs, was appropriate discipline.

Key quotations

This Court must independently determine appropriate discipline. (¶ 4)
Additionally, Respondent acted intentionally and with the purpose to deceive the court and the other party when she turned back the court clerk's filing stamp. (¶ 6)
We further find, as did the trial panel, that these violations constitute a "serious offense." (¶ 7)

Factual background

Meagan Elaine Brooking submitted a pleading for filing on April 19, 2017, but altered the court clerk's filing stamp to show an April 15 filing date. She admitted the conduct and helped identify three other possible incidents, although misconduct was not established as to those incidents. The Court found that she acted intentionally and with the purpose of deceiving the court and the opposing party.

Procedural history

The Oklahoma Bar Association filed a disciplinary proceeding based on a grievance alleging that Brooking altered a court clerk's filing stamp to make a late pleading appear timely. Brooking admitted the April 19, 2017 incident and identified three other possible instances, but the trial panel found misconduct established by clear and convincing evidence only as to the April 19 incident. The panel recommended suspension for up to six months; upon de novo review, the Supreme Court found misconduct and imposed a sixty-day suspension plus costs.

Court Document

Open PDF
Loading document…