On Wednesday, June 28, 2023, the Disciplinary Counsel filed a complaint against attorney Jacqueline Ann O’Brien for failing to defend the client’s counterclaims. The complaint alleges that she neglected her client’s interests and violated several rules of professional conduct.
The case is entitled “Disciplinary Counsel v. Jacqueline Ann O’Brien,” with case no. 2023-021.
The charges cited Ohio Rules of Professional Conduct 1.5(a), 1.16(e), 1.3, 1.4(a)(3), 1.4(a)(4), 1.5(a), 1.16(e) which states:
A lawyer shall act with reasonable diligence and promptness in representing a client.
A lawyer shall keep the client reasonably informed about the status of the matter.
A lawyer shall act with reasonable diligence and promptness in representing a client.
A lawyer shall keep the client reasonably informed about the status of the matter.
A lawyer shall comply as soon as practicable with reasonable requests for information from the client.
The Rules of Professional Conduct can be found here.
The respondent is charged with two counts of professional misconduct. The first count relates to the respondent’s failure to defend the client’s counterclaims, which led to a judgment against the client due to the respondent’s lack of response to a summary judgment motion. The second count accuses the respondent of keeping a refund or part of the fee from another client, despite not filing an answer or responding to the default judgment motion.
The filing states:
“On January 25, 2021, Rigues and explained that he had paid over $19,000 in fees so far with minimal progress on his case. Respondent answered that she intended to refile his counterclaims after the court ruled on the motion to consolidate. She indicated, “I’m concerned I cannot meet your expectations. How would you like to proceed?” On January 29, 2021, sent another email to Rigues to collect the unpaid fees. She stated, “I cannot afford to litigate yours any further without timely payments. As a result, unless you remit immediate payment per our agreement, I will be filing a motion to withdraw this evening.”
The filling continues:
“Rigues paid respondent $20,047.50 in fees to represent him; however, respondent failed to pursue Rigues’s counterclaims and caused a judgment to bc entered against him by failing to respond to the motion for summary judgment. Further, the plaintiff’s basis of the lawsuit against Rigues was seeking the return of the $21, 100 bonus, an amount that was less than the respondent’s total fee. Respondent did not provide respondent a refund of any of his paid fees.”
The filing further states:
“Respondent included an affidavit she completed that indicated, “although she presently is competent and possesses mental capacity to participate in one legal issue at a time, she has been medically ordered to refrain from participating in this case until medical clearance following resolution of her disciplinary matters.” The appeal of the CommutAir case and the legal malpractice case remain pending. Respondent has not provided Kuiper with a refund of any portion of his fee, despite failing to file an answer and response to the motion for default judgment.”
The Disciplinary Counsel asked the court to impose appropriate sanctions on the respondent based on the facts presented.
The request states:
“Relator requests that respondent be found in violation of the Ohio Rules of Professional Conduct and be sanctioned accordingly.”
Ms. O’Brien practices in Cleveland, Ohio. She is licensed in Ohio. Her info can be found on avvo.com.
A copy of the original filing can be found here.
