WHEELING – A former client has sued a suspended Wheeling attorney, accusing him of malicious prosecution after he filed a retaliatory civil lawsuit against her after she had filed an ethics complaint against him.
Jolynn Mecca Gilchrist filed her complaint May 29 in Ohio Circuit Court against Paul J. Harris and Harris Law Offices. Harris’ law license was suspended for two years in March by the state Supreme Court, which found he had committed seven violations of the state Rules of Professional Conduct.
According to the complaint, Gilchrist filed an ethics complaint against Harris in September 2021 with the state Lawyer Disciplinary board. That complaint claims Harris took Gilchrist’s money while misleading her about problems with the IRS in a “federal case involving filing a tax return and structuring.”
Attorney Sean W. Cook is representing Gilchrist.
"Ms. Gilchrist was forced to defend herself against a frivolous lawsuit, and she stood up against the retaliatory and abusive actions of Harris,” Cook told The West Virginia Record. “As is the case with most bullies, Harris wisely chose to abandon his baseless claims against Ms. Gilchrist once she fought back.
“Now Harris must answer for his unlawful actions against Ms. Gilchrist and the damages he caused her."
In December 2021, Harris filed a civil complaint against Gilchrist and others “based solely on her filing of the aforementioned ethics complaint and the events related thereto,” according to Gilchrist’s new complaint.
Harris claimed Gilchrist’s ethics complaint against him was retaliatory and contained statements that were “demonstrably false” and that she made false statements through the media “to a multitude of readers regarding a confidential and false complaint.”
In that 2021 lawsuit, Harris accused Gilchrist of extortion, wiretapping, defamation, breach of contract, tortious interference with a business relationship, civil conspiracy and a tort of outrage.
The LDB closed Gilchrist’s ethics complaint against Harris in June 2023, saying it was time barred, but the LDB said the investigative panel “is deeply concerned” about the allegations against Harris.”
The next month, the LDB investigative panel filed a three-count statement of charges against Harris regarding ethics complaints from three other individuals other than Gilchrist.
“The allegations contained in that statement of charges were strikingly similar to those previously asserted by Ms. Gilchrist in her ethics complaint against Harris,” the new complaint states.
In February 2024, the LDB hearing panel found Harris had committed 23 violations of the Rules of Professional Conduct and recommended his law license be annulled. Harris appealed that recommendation to the state Supreme Court.
And in the Harris lawsuit against Gilchrist and others, Circuit Judge Joseph E. Barki issued a notice of intent to dismiss with prejudice in January unless Harris showed good cause within 15 days why it shouldn’t be dismissed. He didn’t, and Barki dismissed the case February 19, 2025.
One month later, the state Supreme Court issued its decision in Harris’ disciplinary matter.
Gilchrist accuses Harris of malicious prosecution.
“Harris clearly expressed in the underlying complaint that it was filed in retaliation for Ms. Gilchrist asserting a meritorious legal ethics complaint against him,” the complaint states. “Harris did not respond to Ms. Gilchrist’s dismissal motion, which detailed the lack of factual and legal merits of his frivolous claims. …
“The content and timing of the underlying civil complaint brought by Harris against Ms. Gilchrist demonstrates that it was malicious, retaliatory and an attempt to intimidate Ms. Gilchrist – a former client of defendants Harris and HLO. Such maliciousness is further demonstrated by the LDB’s recommendation and the SCAWV’s decision finding Harris responsible for multiple ethical violations that were remarkably similar to those alleged by Ms. Gilchrist in her ethics complaint.”
It also says Harris’ complaint against Gilchrist was without reasonable or probable cause given his failure to pursue the prosecution of his claims, which it says is proven by his failure to pursue the claims against Gilchrist.
Gilchrist seeks compensatory damages for reputational harm as well as for emotional distress, humiliation, mental anguish, inconvenience and all other available damages. She also seeks punitive damages, statutory penalties, interest, court costs, attorney fees and other relief.
She is being represented by South Charleston attorney Sean W. Cook. The case has been assigned to Circuit Judge Michael J. Olejasz.
Ohio Circuit Court case number 25-C-104
