State ex rel Oklahoma Bar Association v. Kelley2/12/2002
__ P.3d __
ORIGINAL PROCEEDING FOR ATTORNEY DISCIPLINE
The Oklahoma Bar Association charged respondent with two counts of professional misconduct. The parties entered into Agreed Stipulations and Recommendation for Discipline. Following a hearing, the trial panel recommended that Kelley receive a private reprimand. Upon de novo review, we conclude Kelley should be publicly reprimanded and pay the costs of this proceeding.
RESPONDENT ORDERED PUBLICLY REPRIMANDED AND ORDERED TO PAY COSTS.
OPINION
On September 18, 2001, the Complainant, Oklahoma Bar Association (OBA), filed a complaint against Respondent, Julie Anne Kelley, alleging two counts of professional misconduct, pursuant to Rule 6, Rules Governing Disciplinary Proceedings, 5 O.S. 1991, Ch. 1, App. 1-A. A hearing was held on November 1, 2001, before a Trial Panel (Panel) of the Professional Responsibility Tribunal (PRT). The OBA and Kelley presented "Agreed Stipulations and Recommendations for Discipline" (stipulations) which became an exhibit in the proceedings. The parties stipulated to a private reprimand as the appropriate discipline in this matter. The charges of misconduct against a lawyer must be established by clear and convincing evidence. See RGDP 6.12(c), 5 O.S. 2001, Ch. 1, App. 1-A.
The Panel issued its report on November 27, 2001, adopting the facts contained in the stipulations. The Panel concluded Kelley''s conduct violated Rules 1.3, 1.4 and 3.2, Oklahoma Rules of Professional Conduct (ORPC), 5 O.S. 1991, Chapter 1, Appendix 3-A, as to Count I of the complaint. As to Count II, the Panel concluded that Kelley violated Rule 5.2, Rules Governing Disciplinary Proceedings (RGDP), 5 O.S. 1991, Chapter 1, Appendix 1-A. The Panel found the violations in both counts were established by clear and convincing evidence and constituted grounds for imposing discipline. It recommended the imposition of a private reprimand and the assessment of costs in the amount of $355.73.
COUNT I
Kelley, an Oklahoma City lawyer, agreed to represent Linda Fowler in a workers'' compensation case which was filed initially by the Doolin law firm in Lawton. Kelley appeared on behalf of Fowler at a temporary docket hearing. Kelley advised Fowler on the possibility of settlement of her claim and contacted opposing counsel, Wade Cole, on the matter several times through December, 1999. However, in January, 2000, Kelley began having personal problems and left her law practice. She did not advise Fowler of this change and gave her no forwarding address or telephone number. Over the next several months, Fowler attempted to reach Kelley. She left several telephone messages for Kelley at the office. However, Kelley''s former firm did not inform Kelley of Fowler''s attempts to reach her. Fowler contacted the Doolin firm which advised her of Kelley''s status and gave her a different telephone number. Fowler was unsuccessful in reaching Kelley at the new telephone number.
Vickie Leyja, a lawyer at the Doolin firm, reached Kelley and told her of Fowler''s attempts to contact her regarding the settlement. The Stipulations provide that Kelley advised Leyja she would contact Cole about the settlement, but that she made no attempt to contact him or to return Fowler''s call. On June 1, 2000, the OBA received a grievance from Fowler against Kelley, complaining of her neglect of the case and her failure to return her calls. In July, 2000, after receiving inquiries from the workers'' compensation carrier about settlement and a copy of Fowler''s grievance against Kelley, the Doolin firm learned Kelley had done nothing since January, 2000, to pursue the settlement. Tha
Page 1 2 3 Oklahoma Employee Leasing Services
Employee Leasing Services
|