STATE ex rel. OKLAHOMA BAR ASSOCIATION v. DRUMMOND
2017 OK 24
| Okla. | 2017Background
- L. Caroline Drummond, admitted 2001, pleaded guilty to a felony for bringing contraband (cell phone, charger, cigarettes) into a Tulsa County jail for her incarcerated client; sentencing was deferred for two years.
- The Oklahoma Bar Association (OBA) initiated a Rule 7 disciplinary proceeding based on the deferred felony plea; the Court entered an interim suspension and held a hearing on mitigation and discipline.
- While under interim suspension, Drummond continued to act as counsel in at least one matter (divorce mediation), failed to notify a client of suspension, and misrepresented her status in filings.
- Separately, under RGDP Rule 6 the OBA charged Drummond with multiple ORPC violations arising from her prior handling of client settlement funds for a minor (A.M.): endorsing and depositing a $30,000 check into her operating account, commingling and spending those funds, bouncing a subsequent check, delayed/partial repayments, and secretive $6,000 transfer.
- Drummond largely failed to cooperate with the OBA investigation, provided untimely responses, and presented minimal credible mitigation at PRT hearings.
- The Professional Responsibility Tribunal found violations of ORPC Rules 1.3, 1.4, 1.15, 5.5, and 8.4 and recommended disbarment; the Supreme Court reviewed de novo and ordered disbarment and assessment of costs.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Does the deferred felony plea (bringing contraband into jail) demonstrate unfitness to practice under RGDP Rule 7 / ORPC 8.4? | OBA: The criminal act involved dishonesty, abuse of attorney privilege, risked safety, and reflects adversely on fitness. | Drummond: Argued misconduct was isolated and offered character/mitigation. | Held: Conviction demonstrates unfitness; ORPC 8.4 violated; suspension/disbarment warranted. |
| Did Drummond misappropriate client funds (ORPC 1.15)? | OBA: She commingled, used settlement funds for personal/business expenses, depleted funds intended for a minor — misappropriation. | Drummond: Asserted remorse, partial repayment, and asserted alternative explanations for transfers/fees. | Held: Clear and convincing evidence of misappropriation; conduct warrants disbarment. |
| Did Drummond fail to communicate and act diligently (ORPC 1.3, 1.4) and cooperate with OBA (RGDP 5.2)? | OBA: She ignored client inquiries, delayed responses to grievances, and required subpoenas for records. | Drummond: Offered limited, self-serving testimony and late responses. | Held: Violations proven by clear and convincing evidence. |
| Did Drummond engage in unauthorized practice while suspended (ORPC 5.5)? | OBA: She held herself out as an attorney to police and continued representing clients after interim suspension. | Drummond: Claimed she did not intend to represent herself as an attorney in the police incident and minimized post-suspension involvement. | Held: Credible testimony contradicted Drummond; unauthorized practice proven. |
Key Cases Cited
- State ex rel. Oklahoma Bar Ass'n v. Conrady, 275 P.3d 133 (Okla. 2012) (criminal acts reflecting on honesty and fitness guide discipline analysis)
- State ex rel. Oklahoma Bar Ass'n v. Mayes, 66 P.3d 398 (Okla. 2003) (misappropriation of minor's settlement funds warrants disbarment)
- State ex rel. Oklahoma Bar Ass'n v. Cooley, 304 P.3d 453 (Okla. 2013) (de novo review in Rule 7 proceedings; framework for discipline determination)
- In re Jones, 744 S.E.2d 6 (Ga. 2013) (delivering contraband to inmate by attorney reflects deceit and supports disbarment)
- Attorney Grievance Comm'n v. Howell, 73 A.3d 202 (Md. 2013) (mailing contraband to inmate violates professional conduct rules)
- State ex rel. Oklahoma Bar Ass'n v. Thompson, 194 P.3d 1281 (Okla. 2008) (criminal conduct that undermines public confidence supports severe discipline)