TO BE .PUBLI SI-IED §§n;pr§m§ Tunrt of BMN AH__| 2017- SC- 000117- KB _©ATEMMM}DC JAMIE L. TURNER . MOVANT KBA Member'No. 93293 ' . v. ' IN sUPREME couRT KENTUCKY BAR AssociATIoN` REsPoNDENT oplmoN ANn oRDER Jamie L. Turner was admitted to the practice of law in October 2009.' Turner’s bar roster address is 212 West Eighth Street, Cincinnati, Ohio 45202, and her KBA number is' 93293. ll Pursuant to §upreme Court Rule (SCR) 3.6'75, Turner’s license _to practice law was suspended for failure to comply With continuing legal v education [CLE] requirements on danuary 20, 2017 . Turner filed a “Notice/ Request for Appeal of Suspended License” on March 20, 2017 appealing that suspension. The Kentucky Bar Association ,(KBA) filed a response requesting that this Court require Turner “to go through the restoration process just like the other KBA former members Who Were suspended for railure to meet their . . . [CLE] licensure requirements.” .For the following re'asons, we agree_with the KBA and adopt its recommendation that Tumer should not be exempt from the restoration process set forth in the Supreme Court Rules. I. BAcKGRoUND; The Director of Continuing Legal Education determined that Turner was deficient the entire twelve credits required for educational year 2015-2016 and 0.75 ethics credits for educational year 2014~2015. Because of anner’s - deficiency, the Dire,ctor' sent correspondence and email notices to 'l`urner. Additionally, CLE department staff spoke with Turner several times when 'she called seeking additional_time to request an extension. Despite being granted an extension for the 2014-2015 educational year, "h.lrner did not cure that deficiency. v l In November 2016, Tumer called the KBA to discuss her 2015-2016 year deficiency and was told that she Would be certified 'as non_-compliant if she could not show some hardship or report timely earned credits. When Tumer failed to do either, the KBA issued a show-cause notice requiring Tumer to explain her failure to comply. Tumer did not respond; therefore, the KBA suspended Turner on Jan`uary 20, 2017 . The notice of suspension advised Turner that she could seek reinstatement pursuant to SCR 3.500 or that she could appeal her suspension within 30 days. Turner did not timely file her appeal but did seek an extension to do so, which this Court granted. On M_arch 20, 2017, Turner filed the above mentioned Notice/Request for -Appeal of Suspencled License. In her Notice and an attached affidavit, Turner states that she attended two three~day conferences in February 2015 and ' 2 February 2016,- which should have earned her 11.5 hours of CLE credit for each year. However, for reasons Tumer cannot explain, those hours were not reported to the KBA. Turner states that she did not realize that the hours had not been reported until she received the notice of suspension. According tol Turner, she did` not open any mail from the KBA because she believed it was in regarding her bar dues, not Cl.E. When shed became'aware of the deficiency, . Turner took an online CLE course_and attended a We'bcast, Which provided a combined 18 hours of credit._ She also stated that'she was in the process of` applying for approval of the credits she earned in February 2016 and that, once approved, she will be in compliance. II. ANALYSIS._ SCR 3.645(1) provides that “every person licensed to practice law in this l Commonwealth . . . shall complete and certify a minimum o_f 12 credit hours in continuing`legal education activities . . . including a minimum of 2 credit hours devoted to ‘ethics, professional responsibility and professionalisrn”’ during “[e]ach educational 'year.” There is no dispute that Tumer failed to meet the preceding requirements during the 2014-2015 and 2015-2016 educational vyears. The only dispute is whether Turner should be relieved from complying __ .with the restoration requirements of SCR 3.500. Tumer argues that she should be excused from compliance because she inadvertently failed to realize she was deficient until November 2016. The :KBA argues that this excuse lacks merit because its personnel made‘numerous attempts to contact Tumer by mail and email and there were multiple telephone"calls to- and from Turner 3 regarding her deficiencies The KBA also notes Turneris failure to respond to the show-cause notice, her dilatoriness in filing her appeal, and`her failure to make any attempt to comply with the restoration requirements_of SCR 3.500 negate ‘Idrner’s argument. l ~ We agree with the KBA that Turner has not provided a sufficient basis to relieve her from the suspension and the requirements of SCR 3.500. The KBA provided more than sufficient notice to Turner of her deficiency, and she -has offered no viable excuse for ignoring that notice. Therefore, Turner’sb suspension shall remain in effect until such time as she complies with SCR 3.500. ACCORDINGLY, IT IS ORDERED THAT: Jarnie L. Turner’s Notice/Request for Appeal of Suspended License is denied, and she shall remain suspended pursuant to the KBA’s Janua:cy 20, _ 2017,N0tice of Suspension until such time as she complies with the appropriate restoration provisions of SCR 3.500. .. All sitting. All concur. ENTERED: June 15, 2017. - . . » 1 / QZ :_ "‘ “' "' "' ` UFEF JUs'rIcE
Jamie L. Turner v. Kentucky Bar Association
Combined Opinion