The Supreme Court of Ohio has disbarred Carolyn Kaye Ranke, a Cleveland attorney previously indefinitely suspended and publicly reprimanded for ethical violations. The court's decision stemmed from Ranke's misconduct in four client matters, including lying to a judge and failing to file an appeal for a man serving a 33-year prison sentence. Justice Patrick F. Fischer, writing for the majority, emphasized that "accepting payment from clients and failing to perform work is 'tantamount to theft,' for which the presumptive sanction is disbarment."
Ranke's history includes wrongdoings in six client matters and at least 40 ethical violations. Justice Fischer noted that Ranke "clearly did not learn her lesson from the prior public reprimand, nor from the previously imposed indefinite suspension." Chief Justice Sharon L. Kennedy and Justice Joseph T. Deters supported this opinion.
In contrast, Justice Melody Stewart believed an indefinite suspension was appropriate, joined by Justice R. Patrick DeWine. The Office of Disciplinary Counsel had proposed this lesser sanction.
Ranke's previous disciplinary actions include a public reprimand in 2010 and an indefinite suspension in 2011, with reinstatement in 2015. New charges were filed against her in 2022 and expanded in 2023 due to misconduct involving four clients.
One case involved Shelda Brantley, who paid Ranke $8,100 but received inadequate representation during litigation with former employees over unpaid wages. As a result of Ranke's negligence, Brantley faced a $307,000 judgment without being informed by her attorney.
Ranke also failed other clients: she neglected to file an appeal for Raphelle Winegarner’s prison sentence; she took $1,300 from Joshmarie Caraballo without performing agreed services; and she mishandled Billie Levert-Hill’s divorce proceedings.
The Board of Professional Conduct found numerous violations by Ranke while representing these clients. The board recommended disbarment due to aggravating factors such as her pattern of misconduct and lack of cooperation with disciplinary processes.
Justice Stewart argued that Ranke’s conduct warranted an indefinite suspension rather than disbarment since it was more aligned with cases where attorneys received suspensions rather than permanent removal from practice.
Ranke was ordered to pay restitution to Levert-Hill and cover the costs of disciplinary proceedings following the court's decision.