Kentucky Bar Association v. Nancy E. Shelby Calloway ( 2007 )


Menu:
  •                                                                           TO BE PUBLISHED
    ,*uyr,rmr (~Vurf of ~
    2007-SC-000116-KB
    IDAM-&O--,atxro-2             .C.,
    KENTUCKY BAR ASSOCIATION                                                          MOVANT
    V.                                  IN SUPREME COURT
    NANCY E . SHELBY CALLOWAY                                                     RESPONDENT
    OPINION AND ORDER OF PUBLIC REPRIMAND
    I . INTRODUCTION
    The Kentucky Bar Association (KBA), pursuant to Supreme Court Rule (SCR)
    3.435, has moved this Court to impose reciprocal discipline on Nancy E. Shelby
    Calloway, KBA Number 10129 . Calloway was admitted to the practice of law in
    Kentucky on October 9, 1980 . Calloway's last known roster address is 308 Shelby-
    Calloway Road, Elkton, Kentucky 42220 .
    On January 26, 2007, the Board of Professional Responsibility of the Supreme
    Court of Tennessee entered an order of Public Censure against Calloway. This action
    was taken based on Calloway's actions during a divorce proceeding in that state . The
    facts are as follows :
    Judge Davies awarded a divorce to Respondent's client on
    grounds of adultery but also found Respondent's client to be
    guilty of an affair with Respondent. In open court Judge
    Davies stated, "Ms. Calloway, your conduct in this case is
    not professional . Don't ever do that again . If I hear about it,
    I'll report you to the Board ."
    Based on these circumstances, the Tennessee Board of Professional Responsibility
    concluded Calloway had violated Tennessee Rules of Professional Conduct 1 .7(b),
    8.4(a), and 8 .4(d).
    Upon receipt of notice of the Tennessee Order of Public Censure, the KBA filed a
    Petition for Reciprocal Discipline. The KBA recommends this Court impose a Public
    Reprimand on Calloway. In accordance with Supreme Court Rule (SCR) 3 .435, we
    ordered Calloway to show cause, if any, why reciprocal discipline should not be
    imposed. Calloway elected to file no response to this Court's Show Cause Order .
    Having failed to show by substantial evidence that either of the exceptions set out in
    SCR 3.435 apply, we conclude reciprocal discipline is mandated by the rule.
    II . ANALYSIS
    SCR 3.435 applies to those situations where members of the KBA have been
    sanctioned for ethical violations in other states . The rule mandates that this Court
    impose "identical discipline unless Respondent proves by substantial evidence" either
    "(a) a lack of jurisdiction or fraud in the out-of-state disciplinary proceeding," or "(b) that
    misconduct established warrants substantially different discipline in this State." See
    SCR 3 .435(4) . Further, the rule requires us to recognize that a final adjudication of
    misconduct in another jurisdiction establishes conclusively the misconduct for purposes
    of a disciplinary proceeding in Kentucky. See SCR 3.435(5) .
    The Board of Professional Responsibility of the Supreme Court of Tennessee
    concluded Calloway's actions during her representation of a client in a divorce case
    violated Tennessee Rule of Professional Conduct 1 .7(b), 8 .4(a), and 8.4(d). SCR
    3.130-1 .7(b) states :
    (b)   A lawyer shall not represent a client if the representation of that client
    2
    may be materially limited by the lawyer's responsibilities to another
    client or to a third person, or by the lawyer's own interests, unless :
    (1)   The lawyer reasonably believes the representation will not be
    adversely affected ; and
    (2)   The client consents after consultation . . . .
    This rule is equivalent to Tennessee Rule of Professional Conduct 1 .7(b) with the
    exception that the Tennessee Rule adds the words "in writing" after "consents" in
    §§(b)(2) . SCR 3.130-8.3(a) states :
    It is professional misconduct for a lawyer to :
    (a)    Violate or attempt to violate the Rules of Professional
    Conduct, knowingly assist or induce another to do so, or do
    so through the acts of another[ .]
    The provisions of SCR 3.130-8 .3(a) are identical to the provisions of Tennessee Rule of
    Professional Conduct 8 .4(a). Kentucky has not adopted a rule equivalent to Tennessee
    Rule of Professional Conduct 8 .4(d).
    Inasmuch as Calloway has been disciplined by the Board of Professional
    Responsibility of the Supreme Court of Tennessee by Order of Public Censure, and
    inasmuch as Calloway's actions are governed by equivalent rules of professional
    conduct in the Commonwealth of Kentucky, Calloway is subject to Public Reprimand as
    authorized by SCR 3.380 . Further, this Court has imposed the sanction of Public
    Reprimand for similar conduct. See Bezold v. Kentucky Bar Assoc. , 134 S .W.3d 556
    (Ky. 2004)(attorney admitted romantic involvement with client in a divorce action, court
    found violation of SCR 3.130-1 .7(b)). Thus, we can find no reason to believe
    Calloway's conduct warrants substantially different discipline .
    This rule is equivalent to Tennessee Rule of Professional Conduct 1 .7(b) with the
    exception that the Tennessee Rule adds the words "in writing" after "consents" in
    §§(b)(2) . SCR 3.130-8 .3(a) states :
    It is professional misconduct for a lawyer to:
    (a)   Violate or attempt to violate the Rules of Professional
    Conduct, knowingly assist or induce another to do so, or do
    so through the acts of another[ .]
    The provisions of SCR 3.130-8 .3(a) are identical to the provisions of Tennessee Rule of
    Professional Conduct 8.4(a). Kentucky has not adopted a rule equivalent to Tennessee
    Rule of Professional Conduct 8 .4(d).
    Inasmuch as Calloway has been disciplined by the Board of Professional
    Responsibility of the Supreme Court of Tennessee by Order of Public Censure, and
    inasmuch as Calloway's actions are governed by equivalent rules of professional
    conduct in the Commonwealth of Kentucky, Calloway is subject to Public Reprimand as
    authorized by SCR 3.380 . Further, this Court has imposed the sanction of Public
    Reprimand for similar conduct. See Bezold v. Kentucky Bar Assoc . , 134 S .W .3d 556
    (Ky. 2004)(attorney admitted romantic involvement with client in a divorce action, court
    found violation of SCR 3 .130-1 .7(b)) . Thus, we can find no reason to believe
    Calloway's conduct warrants substantially different discipline .
    III . CONCLUSION
    SCR 3.435 governs petitions for reciprocal discipline . Calloway has failed to
    prove by substantial evidence that either of the exceptions set out in the rule. See SCR
    3.435(4) . Therefore, this Court shall impose reciprocal discipline as follows :
    IT IS HEREBY ORDERED :
    1.   Nancy E . Shelby Galloway, KBA Member Number 10129, is adjudicated
    guilty of unprofessional conduct based on the facts set out in KBA file 14983.
    2.   Nancy E . Shelby Galloway is Publicly Reprimanded for her conduct .
    3.   In accordance with SCR 3 .450, Nancy E. Shelby Galloway shall pay all costs
    associated with these disciplinary proceedings, for which execution may issue from this
    Court upon finality of this Order.
    All sitting . All concur.
    ENTERED : June 14, 2007 .
    

Document Info

Docket Number: 2007 SC 000116

Filed Date: 6/14/2007

Precedential Status: Precedential

Modified Date: 10/8/2015