Eligible To Seek Reinstatement
A felony conviction drew a back-dated suspension from the Nebraska Supreme Court, making the attorney eligible to apply for reinstatement
After a bench trial, the respondent was found guilty of “Count I: Abuse of a Vulnerable Adult, a Class IIIA Felony.” The court found the respondent “not guilty of Count II: Theft by unlawful taking, $5,000 or more.” The respondent was sentenced to a 5-year term of probation to include incarceration for 90 days in the county jail.
She was interim suspended in January 2020
The temporary suspension concerned criminal charges regarding the respondent’s mother, who was in a nursing facility, and arose out of contentions between the respondent and the nursing facility. These criminal charges were eventually dismissed.
These proceedings
The respondent represented Rachel K. and Richard K., the mother and stepfather respectively of J.R.K., an autistic person with several other mental health conditions. Rachel and Richard did not have a prior relationship with the respondent at the time they retained her legal services in 2011. After Rachel passed away, J.R.K. wanted to change her name to Richard’s last name to have some better connection to her stepfather, as he was her only remaining relative living in Nebraska. Richard did not object. The respondent sought a legal name change for J.R.K., and it was approved.
J.R.K. is an adult woman with developmental and mental disabilities. She also had some physical ailments. Due to these disabilities, she receives Social Security disability income and qualifies for Medicaid benefits, including vocational and residential services. During the relevant time period, J.R.K. lived with, and was assisted in her daily activities by, an extended family home provider, who was paid a daily contract rate by the State of Nebraska. J.R.K. also earned income from working at her part-time jobs. The respondent testified that J.R.K. sometimes had difficult emotional or violent behaviors.
In the early years of the respondent’s representation of Rachel and Richard, she had infrequent contact with J.R.K. J.R.K. lived at home with Rachel and Richard and had already qualified for and received Social Security disability payments, and the respondent had not been involved in obtaining those benefits.
Rachel and Richard had tried to find a home placement for J.R.K. but were unsuccessful because of J.R.K.’s behaviors. When they were appointed guardians and conservators, it was to help find living arrangements for J.R.K. and to manage her limited income. They did not involve the respondent in preparing reports. They occasionally asked the respondent questions but did not involve her in the paperwork.
Her ongoing involvement resulted in the criminal charges
The respondent’s payments to herself out of accounts on which she was trustee resulted in the criminal charges against her for theft and exploitation of a vulnerable adult discussed above. The respondent did not obtain court approval for payments to herself. In this regard, she testified in the criminal case, “I had a good faith intentional belief that these trusts allowed for the trustees to make any payments on the behalf of professional services without court supervision. It was the old way of doing things with these Special Needs Trusts.” During Rachel’s life, she had paid the respondent out of these accounts. The respondent believed that the termination of the conservatorship removed the “Special Needs Trusts” from judicial supervision and that the trust would not operate like the guardianship accounts.
The respondent claimed that she had a standing agreement with Rachel and Richard that when she did things required to attend to J.R.K.’s needs, she would be paid her legal rate. The respondent testified that she performed all the services she invoiced for and more.
The court noted letters of support and a number of challenges she faced
It is the judgment of this court that the respondent is hereby suspended from the practice of law from January 27, 2020, to the date this opinion was filed. The respondent is eligible to apply for reinstatement as of the date of this opinion, which application will be considered on the basis of a showing of her fitness to practice law and compliance with all requirements.
The case is STATE EX REL. COUNSEL FOR DIS. V. VANDERFORD, 317 Neb. 771 (Mike Frisch)