STATE ex rel. OKLAHOMA BAR ASSOCIATION v. HYDE, 397 P.3d 1286

Background

Martha Lynne Hyde, admitted in Oklahoma in 2012, was sanctioned by the U.S. Bankruptcy Court (N.D. Okla.) via an Agreed Order and Agreed Judgment that suspended her from practicing in the Northern and Eastern Districts' Bankruptcy Courts for five years.
The sanctions arose from Hyde's representation of Stephen Lynch in attempts to vacate prior bankruptcy orders and in a subsequent adversary proceeding dismissed with prejudice; defendants moved for sanctions under Fed. R. Bankr. P. 9011 for filing frivolous and abusive claims and making threatening statements.
Hyde accepted a settlement shortly before a sanctions hearing; no evidentiary hearing transcript exists. The settlement referenced and granted motions for sanctions and contempt.
Hyde notified the Oklahoma Bar and sought guidance whether the bankruptcy orders triggered reciprocal reporting under Rule 7.7; the Bar initiated reciprocal disciplinary proceedings in Oklahoma based on those orders.
Hyde argued the agreed orders were settlements (not adjudications) and were not referred to the federal disciplinary committee, so they should not support reciprocal discipline; the Oklahoma Supreme Court rejected these arguments.
The Court found violations of multiple Oklahoma Rules of Professional Conduct (competence, meritorious claims, fair conduct, prejudicial conduct) and imposed a six-month suspension from practicing law in Oklahoma and required participation in Lawyers Helping Lawyers (Court deemed the five-year federal suspension a mitigating factor but excessive to replicate here).

Issues

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether a federal court's consent-based sanctions/order can trigger Rule 7.7 reciprocal discipline	Bar: The bankruptcy court's Agreed Order/Judgment constitutes an adjudication and prima facie evidence under Rule 7.7(b).	Hyde: The orders were settlements/consent judgments encouraged by the judge, not adjudications; no referral to disciplinary committee occurred.	Court: Consent judgments/orders are adjudicatory for Rule 7.7 purposes; settlement does not negate their use as prima facie evidence.
Whether Rule 7.7 requires a prior referral to the federal disciplinary committee before reciprocal discipline	Bar: Rule 7.7(b) requires transmission of the adjudication to the Chief Justice; prior local referral is not a prerequisite to Oklahoma discipline.	Hyde: Sanctions were not confirmed by the District's Disciplinary Committee, so they shouldn't be the basis for reciprocal discipline.	Court: Referral to the District's disciplinary committee is not required; the bankruptcy order itself suffices for reciprocal proceedings.
Scope of review and opportunity to challenge foreign findings	Bar: The transmitted documents constitute prima facie evidence; Oklahoma may consider limited challenge via certified transcript.	Hyde: Lack of transcript and no hearing in bankruptcy court prevents fair assessment of underlying facts.	Court: Rule 7.7 limits challenge to certified transcripts; absence of transcript restricts factual relitigation, but respondent may offer mitigating evidence.
Appropriate discipline in Oklahoma given federal sanctions	Bar: Federal five-year suspension is a mitigating factor but Oklahoma may impose different discipline.	Hyde: Federal five-year suspension and circumstances (health, novice practitioner, first client) warrant leniency or parity.	Court: Imposed six-month suspension and Lawyers Helping Lawyers participation; regarded federal five-year sanction as significant mitigation but too severe to replicate.

Key Cases Cited

State ex rel. Oklahoma Bar Ass'n v. Patterson, 28 P.3d 551 (Okla. 2001) (framework for reciprocal disciplinary proceedings and limits on relitigation)
State ex rel. Oklahoma Bar Ass'n v. Heinen, 60 P.3d 1018 (Okla. 2002) (treatment of consent judgments in reciprocal discipline)
State ex rel. Oklahoma Bar Ass'n v. Tweedy, 52 P.3d 1003 (Okla. 2000) (suspension for vexatious, baseless filings; federal discipline as mitigating factor)
State ex rel. Oklahoma Bar Ass'n v. Oliver, 369 P.3d 1074 (Okla. 2016) (reciprocal discipline based on bankruptcy court sanctions and notice/opportunity principles)
State ex rel. Oklahoma Bar Ass'n v. Wintory, 350 P.3d 131 (Okla. 2015) (limits on attacking foreign fact-finding without certified transcript)