Kentucky Attorney Brandy Kathleen Lawrence Barrett Disciplined for False Claims of Judicial Misconduct in Custody Case

On Thursday, August 14, 2025, the Supreme Court of Kentucky suspended Attorney Brandy Kathleen Lawrence Barrett from practicing law for thirty days, with the suspension probated for one year under specific conditions. This decision follows a negotiated sanction agreement between Barrett and the Office of Bar Counsel (OBC) regarding her conduct in a child custody case.

The case is entitled “In the Matter of Brandy Kathleen Lawrence Barrett,” with case no. 2025-SC-0184-KB.

Barrett faced disciplinary action stemming from her representation of Benjamin Dusing in a custody dispute against the child’s mother, Jill Bakker. The case, which was heard in the Kenton Circuit Court’s Family Court Division, had been plagued by multiple continuances before Barrett’s involvement, including delays due to Dusing’s failure to meet with a court-appointed evaluator and motions to disqualify the presiding judge.

In January 2021, Dusing filed a motion requesting an indefinite continuance of the trial, citing a scheduling conflict and health issues related to COVID-19. The presiding judge denied this motion shortly before the trial was set to begin. Just days before the trial, Barrett submitted a motion to disqualify Bakker’s attorney, Stephanie Dietz. In addition to representing Bakker against Dusing, Dietz also represented Barrett’s estranged husband in an unrelated personal domestic relations case.

The trial proceeded as scheduled, and the judge ultimately awarded sole custody of the child to Bakker, prompting Dusing to file a pro se motion to alter or vacate the order. Following this, Barrett filed multiple motions to disqualify the presiding judge and raise concerns about alleged judicial misconduct involving court staff, specifically targeting Alice Keys, the judge’s staff attorney.

Barrett’s motions included serious accusations, claiming that the court staff had engaged in misconduct and that the proceedings had been improperly influenced. These allegations were made without sufficient evidence to substantiate her claims, leading to scrutiny from the Inquiry Commission of the Kentucky Bar Association (KBA).

In January 2025, the KBA’s Inquiry Commission issued a formal charge against Barrett, to which she responded in March. Subsequently, she and the OBC reached a negotiated sanction agreement pursuant to SCR 3.480(2). Barrett admitted to violating two counts of SCR 3.130(3.4)(f), which prohibits attorneys from presenting or threatening to present criminal or disciplinary charges solely for the purpose of gaining an advantage in a civil matter. She also acknowledged violating SCR 3.130(8.2)(a), which forbids making false statements regarding the qualifications or integrity of a judge.

In her defense, Barrett stated that she was influenced by Dusing, an older and more experienced attorney. However, she accepted responsibility for her actions and recognized the inappropriateness of her conduct and the language used in her motions.

The Supreme Court’s order stipulates several conditions for Barrett’s probationary period, including the timely payment of KBA membership dues and continuing legal education requirements. Additionally, she must avoid any future charges of professional misconduct during her probation. Failure to comply with these terms may result in a thirty-day suspension.