Disbarment Proposed For Former Hearing Board Member

The Illinois Review Board has recommended the disbarment of a former judge convicted in a federal fraud trial

Respondent’s misconduct was extremely serious. From 2004 to 2007, Respondent intentionally engaged in criminal activity involving a pattern of dishonest and deceitful conduct, for personal gain, which resulted in Respondent’s obtaining $1.4 million from victim lenders. As evidenced by her criminal conviction, Respondent participated in a scheme to intentionally defraud lenders by knowingly making false and fraudulent representations, which included Respondent’s falsely overstating her income, understating her liabilities, and misrepresenting her employment, as well as providing other false and misleading information to lenders.

Sanction

Although no two cases are identical, disbarment is consistent with the sanctions imposed in cases where attorneys have engaged in serious criminal conduct, similar to Respondent’s conduct. Moreover, after considering legal precedent, we find that Respondent’s extensive fraud scheme, which lasted for years and caused a large financial loss, together with
Respondent’s unwillingness to recognize the wrongfulness of her actions and her attitude towards the justice system and the disciplinary process, support our determination that disbarment is appropriate.

Respondent had denied the misconduct that underpinned the conviction notwithstanding her contrary admissions at sentencing and the conclusiveness of the conviction.

Respondent continues to deny that she engaged in any wrongdoing and she still refuses to accept responsibility; Respondent admitted her guilt during her federal sentencing hearing, but now asserts that she is innocent; and Respondent continues to make baseless claims that she is the victim of prosecutorial misconduct, and unfounded accusations of wrongdoing by the Administrator and the Hearing Board. Moreover, Respondent has not repaid the $660,000 loss that she caused; and though she has had limited income since her sentencing, she has failed to take appropriate steps voluntarily to repay the victim lenders during the ten years before her sentencing.

One notable fact

It is also an aggravating factor that during two years of the fraud scheme (2006- 2007), Respondent was a member of the ARDC’s Hearing Board, where she recommended sanctions for other attorneys who engaged in unethical conduct, while Respondent herself was engaging in unethical conduct. Such behavior is incomprehensible and shows Respondent’s disregard for her own personal and professional integrity. It also suggests that the public may need to be protected from Respondent…

Moreover, committing fraud while serving on the ARDC Hearing Board may tarnish the legal profession’s reputation, and undermine the public’s confidence in the disciplinary process itself.

(Mike Frisch)