STATE ex rel. OKLAHOMA BAR ASSOCIATION v. ABDOVEIS
2024 OK 55
Okla.2024Background
- Michael Robert Abdoveis, a staff attorney at Catholic Charities of Eastern Oklahoma handling immigration cases, was charged with professional misconduct by the Oklahoma Bar Association (OBA) based on multiple client grievances.
- The OBA's complaint, following an internal audit and client complaints, alleged a widespread pattern of client neglect, false statements regarding case filings, failures to properly file applications, and the fabrication of a document.
- Abdoveis admitted to most allegations, citing an overwhelming caseload (managing up to 700 cases) and inadequate supervision as contributing factors. He cooperated with the investigation and showed remorse.
- The Professional Responsibility Tribunal recommended a six-month suspension.
- The Oklahoma Supreme Court conducted a de novo review, found clear and convincing evidence of multiple rule violations, and increased the disciplinary suspension to one year, plus costs.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Neglect/Misrepresentation of Clients' Cases | Abdoveis failed to pursue cases diligently and misrepresented status to clients, including fabricating a document. | Abdoveis admitted to neglect and misrepresentation, attributing it to being overwhelmed and insufficiently trained. | Violation found. OBA met burden on multiple rules. |
| Failure to Timely Communicate/Inform Clients | Abdoveis did not keep clients informed or respond to inquiries, harming their immigration prospects. | Abdoveis admitted communication failures, partly blaming overwhelming caseload. | Violation found. OBA met burden. |
| Competence and Diligence in Legal Representation | Abdoveis provided incompetent, undiligent representation, causing clients harm (e.g., lapsed filings, eligibility lost). | Abdoveis contended some filings had a reasonable legal basis but admitted not following up and being overwhelmed. | Violation found on most but not all allegations. |
| Appropriate Sanction | Serious, repeated misconduct merits suspension greater than six months. | Abdoveis and PRT recommended a six-month suspension, citing cooperation, remorse, and no prior discipline. | One-year suspension imposed by Supreme Court. |
Key Cases Cited
- State ex rel. Oklahoma Bar Ass'n v. Loeliger, 127 P.3d 591 (Okla. 2005) (60-day suspension for client misrepresentation and document fabrication, considering lack of prior discipline and other mitigation)
- State ex rel. Oklahoma Bar Ass'n v. Bolusky, 23 P.3d 268 (Okla. 2001) (two-year suspension for multiple client deceptions, including fabricated filings)
- State ex rel. Oklahoma Bar Ass'n v. Thomas, 911 P.2d 907 (Okla. 1995) (disbarment for forging legal documents and client misrepresentation)
- State ex rel. Oklahoma Bar Ass'n v. Hulett, 183 P.3d 1014 (Okla. 2008) (neglect and lack of diligence warranting up to two-year suspension, even where overwhelmed caseload is asserted)
- State ex rel. Oklahoma Bar Ass'n v. Boone, 367 P.3d 509 (Okla. 2016) (six-month suspension for pattern of neglect and lack of communication with clients)