What Ohio must change so this never happens to another child
I went into the hearing that took my sons with a lawyer I had never hired, and the hearing came with almost no notice. These are the changes I am asking for, based on what happened with my co-counsel.
Changes needed in Ohio law
- No ghost counsel. Kimberly Valenti brought Attorney Chapman in and paid him; she told me she paid him $500. I never signed anything with him, and Kimberly told me not to tell him anything. Any lawyer who appears for a parent should need a signed engagement with that parent that says who is paying and who directs the case. When a third person pays, the client has to give informed consent and the lawyer's judgment cannot be steered by the payer (Prof.Cond.R. 1.8(f)); the client decides the objectives (Prof.Cond.R. 1.2(a)). Lead counsel and co-counsel should both answer for the case.
- Real notice before a hearing that can take a child. His appearance was filed five days before my May 20, 2022 hearing. Opposing counsel filed a contempt motion seven days before it and a notice of service of subpoena two days before it. Our joint reply was filed at 11:42 PM the night before. Ohio should set a minimum notice period for motions, witness lists and exhibits before any hearing that can change where a child lives, and a parent whose lawyer appeared within the last seven days should be entitled to a continuance on request.
- No waiving closing argument without the client. He waived closing argument without asking me. A lawyer must consult the client about how the client's objectives are pursued (Prof.Cond.R. 1.2(a) and 1.4(a)(2)). In a custody hearing, a waiver of closing argument should require the client's consent, confirmed on the record.
- A pre-hearing checklist for the child's voice. Neither of my lawyers asked for an interview of my sons (R.C. 3109.04(B)(1)) or for a guardian ad litem. Before a custody hearing, counsel should have to certify that they explained both options to the client.
What Senate Bill 174 should add
Senate Bill 174 of the 136th General Assembly, sponsored by Senators Theresa Gavarone and Paula Hicks-Hudson, rewrites Ohio custody law. It replaces "residential parent," shared parenting and sole custody with court-approved parenting plans. It passed the Senate on November 12, 2025, and it is now in the House Judiciary Committee, which last heard it on June 10, 2026. It is not law yet. Section numbers below are the bill's new numbers, taken from the Legislative Service Commission analysis of the version as passed by the Senate.
- Notice before temporary orders. The bill lets a court issue a temporary parenting order on affidavit. If the order was made without an oral hearing, a party can ask for one, and the court must hold it within 28 days (R.C. 3109.0422 and 3109.0423). It should also set a minimum notice period before any hearing that can move a child, and guarantee a continuance when a parent's lawyer is new to the case.
- A guardian ad litem before a child's home is changed. Under the bill the court "may" appoint a guardian ad litem, or must where other law requires it (R.C. 3109.0461). Appointment should be required, on either parent's request or whenever domestic violence is alleged, before any temporary order changes a child's primary home.
- Make the interview right real. The bill keeps the mandatory interview on request (R.C. 3109.0445). It should require the court to confirm on the record that each parent was told of that right before the hearing begins.
John E. Chapman was my second lawyer in my custody case, Summit County Domestic Relations Court, DR-2022-03-0667, and in my protection-order case, DR-2022-05-1201. He came in as co-counsel beside Kimberly Valenti a few days before the hearing where I lost my sons. He tried that hearing. Six days after the custody order, Kimberly told me to fire him, and I did.
What happened
Kimberly Valenti brought John Chapman into my case on May 15, 2022, five days before the hearing that took my sons, and she paid him; she told me she paid him $500. I never signed anything with him, Kimberly told me not to tell him anything, and I met him for the first time on May 20, 2022, the day of that hearing, at his office, before he drove me to court. At the May 20, 2022 hearing, a trial by ambush, my ex-husband's lawyers called eight witnesses and offered exhibits numbered 1 through 10; my side called two witnesses, a police officer and me, and offered four exhibits. He asked for no interview of my sons and no guardian ad litem, and he waived closing argument without asking me. On June 8, 2022 the court gave my sons to my ex-husband; I have found no ruling on the emergency motion he filed the next night, and apart from that motion, no response from him to my ex-husband's motion to disclose my location appears on the docket before the court granted it "upon written motion" on June 14. On June 13, 2022 four affidavits and my answer and counterclaim were filed in my name, when I was in no state to review or agree to anything; I was traumatized. On June 14 Kimberly told me to fire him, and I did, by text. He did not know which case I meant; he promised me a final accounting and my file by the end of that week. On June 19, five days after he was fired, he filed a motion to withdraw with a certificate of service listing only my ex-husband's side. He never told me about the stay motion or that filing. I never received the accounting. On June 24 I asked him to give the file, including all recordings, to Kimberly; she never gave it to me, and I got only part of it back later through attorney Darren DeHaven, with other things missing.
Running totals of what this cost me are on the costs and time page.
This is the second page in a series about the professionals in my case, in the order they came into it. Each page says what I believe went wrong and points to the dated document behind it. This page combines court records, texts, police records and my own firsthand recollections. I am not a lawyer; where I name an ethics rule, a court rule or a statute, whether it was broken is for a disciplinary board or a court to decide.
Who he is, and how he came into my case
Attorney Chapman (Ohio registration no. 0075653) has a solo practice in Akron. His own public listings describe his main practice as criminal defense, drawing on years as a prosecutor, plus some civil litigation and child custody work.
On May 15, 2022 at 4:50 PM he filed a "Notice of Appearance, Co-Counsel" in my divorce case "on behalf of the Defendant," me.
Kimberly Valenti hired him, and Kimberly paid him. I did not. Kimberly told me she paid him $500. She told me she couldn't represent me herself because it was a conflict, because of her friendship with Judge Steinhauer, and that is why she hired him. I don't recall exactly when she told me. It was sometime before or at my May 20, 2022 hearing; his appearance was filed May 15 (see the Valenti page). She threw me to the wolves, with nothing presented for me at that hearing. I never signed a fee agreement or engagement letter with him, and he never told me in writing what he would do or what it cost. The court record shows that Kimberly never withdrew. She stayed on as my lawyer of record, sat beside him at the May 20 hearing, and co-signed his filings.
I can find no email between him and me in either of my mailboxes. In my texts, what I knew about him came through Kimberly. On June 12, 2022 she wrote: "Also on all affidavits make sure you put both case numbers per Attorney Chapman." On June 13 she asked me, "Address for Chapman?" and then "Meet John in the afternoon. Remember." I wrote back: "What's Chapman's number so I can coordinate." At 10:56 AM she sent it. Until that morning, after the hearing and after the custody order, I did not even have my own lawyer's phone number. Every text he and I ever exchanged is in the section below: eleven messages, June 13 to June 24, 2022.
Kimberly told me not to tell him anything. She told me to speak to no one and to keep a copy of my protection order on me at all times. She directed every single move I made, and I did what I was told. So the lawyer trying my case was getting what he knew about it from the lawyer who hired and paid him, not from me.
Ohio's ethics rules say a lawyer may take payment from someone other than the client only if "the client gives informed consent," there is "no interference with the lawyer's independence of professional judgment or with the client-lawyer relationship," and the client's confidences are protected (Prof.Cond.R. 1.8(f)). A lawyer "shall not permit a person who recommends, employs, or pays the lawyer to render legal services for another to direct or regulate the lawyer's professional judgment" (Prof.Cond.R. 5.4(c)). And a lawyer must "reasonably consult with the client about the means by which the client's objectives are to be accomplished" and "keep the client reasonably informed" (Prof.Cond.R. 1.4(a)(2)–(3)). I was never asked to consent to Kimberly paying him. His lawyer-client relationship with me ran through her.
I first met and spoke with Attorney Chapman on May 20, 2022, the day of my hearing. I had no contact with him before then. I met him at his office that day, and he drove me from there to court, and Kimberly was a half hour late to the hearing. So the pre-hearing statement and witness list he filed for me on May 19 were filed before he had ever spoken to me, and the lawyer who tried the hearing that decided where my sons would live met me that same day.
Paperwork I can't trust
The same problems show up in almost every filing he signed. Every filing he signed alone that I can read (his notice of appearance, his emergency stay motion and his motion to withdraw) is signed "Attorney for Plaintiff." The plaintiff was my ex-husband. I was the defendant.
The motion for contempt he and Kimberly filed for me on May 23, 2022 mixed up who was who. It says the protection order "lists the Respondent [my ex-husband] and the children" as protected persons. I was the protected person, with my sons. It says he called detective agencies "seeking to locate the Respondent," when he was looking for me. And it calls the conduct "a willful disregard of the Order of Protection by the Petitioner," which was me. It also refers to cross-examination "at the May 9 hearing." The hearing with cross-examination was May 20.
Across his filings, his own zip code, phone number and email address are listed two different ways. I am not saying any single typo cost me my case. I believe the pattern shows how much care was, or wasn't, going into my file, in a case where my children were at stake and opposing counsel read every word (Prof.Cond.R. 1.1, 1.3).
May 20, 2022: the hearing where I lost my sons
At the full hearing on May 20, 2022, Attorney Chapman did most of the courtroom work for me. The transcript shows he cross-examined every witness my ex-husband called, including my ex-husband. He also questioned me and the other witness on my side. Kimberly Valenti handled one short recross. That work is real, and it is on the record.
That hearing was a trial by ambush. It decided where my sons would live, and I went into it with Attorney Chapman, whose appearance had been filed five days earlier, on May 15. In the eleven days before it, opposing counsel filed an emergency ex parte motion (May 9), served subpoenas (notice May 12), filed a motion for contempt (May 13), and filed another notice of service of subpoena on May 18, two days before the hearing. My side's pre-hearing statement, witness and exhibit list, and our joint reply were filed the night before, on May 19; the reply was filed at 11:42 PM. Nothing meaningful was presented for me. (Docket, DR-2022-03-0667, 5/9–5/19/2022.)
The transcript shows how lopsided it was. My ex-husband's lawyers called eight witnesses, and their exhibits ran from 1 to 10. My side called two: Officer Emily Roxbury of the Sagamore Hills Police Department, and me. Our case takes up pages 261 to 346 of a 394-page transcript. Our exhibits were my photographs (Exhibit A) and certified records of my ex-husband's Stow Municipal Court case (Exhibits B, C and D), which Attorney Chapman offered at the very end, with no testimony about them. He said "No objection" to most of the other side's exhibits, including their police report, the emails, my ex-husband's calendar, and the texts between me and my ex-husband's mother. (Transcript pp. 384–392.)
My two lawyers were not working together. When my ex-husband's calendar came up, Attorney Chapman said he had no objection, and Kimberly then objected to it. The judge told them: "Y'all have to -- y'all have to be on the same page here on both sides." Kimberly turned to him: "John, object to the contents of this exhibit." He answered: "Doesn't matter what purpose."
Two things are not on the record. In the whole transcript I can find no request by either of my lawyers that the judge interview my sons in chambers, and no request for a guardian ad litem. Ohio law says the court "in its discretion, may and, upon the request of either party, shall interview in chambers any or all of the involved children" (R.C. 3109.04(B)(1)). The June 8, 2022 order that took my sons from me says "an in camera interview has not taken place" and "A guardian ad litem is not currently assigned to this case."
At the end of the day, Kimberly asked, "Do we get a closing?" The judge said she didn't "necessarily need closings." Attorney Chapman said: "Just for the record, we would waive closing as well. I think that we would just rehash what was stated in opening statements." Lawyers can waive closing as a strategy. But this was the last chance to speak for me before a decision about where my sons would live, and I believe it should have been used. He did not check with me before he waived it. Under the ethics rules, the lawyer decides many tactical points, but must "consult with the client as to the means" by which the client's goals are pursued (Prof.Cond.R. 1.2(a), 1.4(a)(2)).
June 9, 2022: the emergency motion
The day after the custody order, at 11:57 PM on June 9, 2022, Attorney Chapman filed my "Motion to Stay Execution of Order and Motion to Modify Child Custody" in both case numbers. It asked the court to pause the order until 6 PM on Monday, June 13, to restore joint custody, and to set a hearing. It made a real legal point: a civil protection order "is not regarded as a custody proceeding" (citing Tabler v. Myers, 173 Ohio App.3d 657 (7th Dist. 2007)). I believe this was the most important filing anyone made for me that month.
But the filing has the same problems. It is signed "Attorney for Plaintiff." Its certificate of service says the motion "was sent to Defendant," his own client, me. It does not say it was served on my ex-husband's lawyers. Ohio's civil rule says that when a party has a lawyer, service "shall be made on the attorney." The proof of service has to "state the date and manner of service," and "Documents filed with the court shall not be considered until proof of service is endorsed thereon" (Civ.R. 5(B)(1), (B)(4)). The court's own local rule says "All motions filed shall contain a request for service or a certification of service of the motion upon opposing counsel" (Summit DR Loc.R. 2.08(A)). I don't know whether the clerk's e-filing system sent it to the other side anyway. But I have never found a ruling on this motion. My sons were handed over on June 11 while it was pending, and an order dated June 14 doesn't mention it. I believe the court should have ruled on it either way. I also believe my lawyer should have filed it with a proper proof of service and pushed for a ruling, in the five days before I fired him at Kimberly's direction. He never told me he was filing it.
The same day, June 9, my ex-husband's lawyers filed a motion to make me disclose where my sons were and deliver them to him. Apart from his stay motion that night, no response from Attorney Chapman to that motion appears on the docket. On June 14, 2022 at 9:31 AM the court granted it "upon written motion," ordering my sons delivered to the Sagamore Hills Police Department by 5:00 PM on June 13, a deadline that had already passed when the order was entered. The order was sent to "John Chapman and Kimberly Valenti, counsel for Defendant." (Docket entries 37 and 62; order of 6/14/2022.)
June 13, 2022: the affidavits
On June 13, 2022 he filed four affidavits in my name: a health insurance affidavit, an affidavit of income and expenses, an affidavit of property, and a parenting proceeding affidavit. None of them can be viewed online, and I have requested copies. The same afternoon, at 4:04 PM, he filed my answer and counterclaim for divorce (Ohio Uniform Domestic Relations Form 9), asking that I be named residential parent "due to mother being primary residential parent since birth." It came five days after the custody order.
The four affidavits and my answer and counterclaim were filed in my name on June 13, 2022, when I was in no state to review or agree to anything. I was traumatized; my sons had been taken five days earlier. My lawyers drafted them, and I don't know what the affidavits say.
An affidavit is a sworn statement, and these went to the court in my name. I still have not been able to read them. Did my lawyers explain each one to me enough to let me make an informed decision about signing it (Prof.Cond.R. 1.4(b))? Was filing sworn statements I could not meaningfully review the "thoroughness and preparation reasonably necessary" (Prof.Cond.R. 1.1)? And if anything in them turns out to be inaccurate, did counsel meet the duty of candor to the court, including the duty to correct a false statement of material fact once a lawyer learns of it (Prof.Cond.R. 3.3(a))?
That afternoon I texted Kimberly: "What time we meeting with the new lawyer?" and "And I assume I'm not meeting with Chapman now."
June 13–24, 2022: every text between us
These are all the texts between Attorney Chapman and me, from my iPhone's message records. There are eleven. The first is from June 13, 2022, five days after the custody order. There are none before that, and none about the hearing, the stay motion or his June 19 filing.
| Date and time | From | Text |
|---|---|---|
| 6/13/2022, 10:56 AM | Me | "Hi what time are we meeting and where" |
| No reply from him in the thread. At 1:41 PM I texted Kimberly: "And I assume I'm not meeting with Chapman now." | ||
| 6/14/2022, 2:51 PM | Me | "Please send me a final accounting of your work for me and any funds not used as I am terminating our arrangement for representation. Thank you very much." |
| 6/14/2022, 2:55 PM | Attorney Chapman | "I can do that. I don't have your name attached to this number." |
| 6/14/2022, 3:02 PM | Attorney Chapman | "Without your name I don't know which case your referring to." |
| 6/14/2022, 3:02 PM | Me | (my full name) and "I'm sorry" |
| 6/14/2022, 3:03 PM | Attorney Chapman | "Thank you." |
| 6/14/2022, 6:09 PM | Attorney Chapman | "I've prepared my final accounting as requested. I'm going to box up your file and will provide everything to you by the end of the week." |
| 6/14/2022, 6:10 PM | Me | "Thank you very much" |
| 6/24/2022, 8:29 AM | Me | "Can you please give the files including all recordings to Kimberly as soon as possible? Thank you." |
| 6/24/2022, 9:03 AM | Attorney Chapman | "Yes. I have them ready and will deliver to her. She should have nearly everything already. Most of what I have are copies I got from her." |
A month after he appeared for me, and after he had tried the hearing that took my sons, he did not have my name attached to my number and did not know which case I meant. He told me he had prepared a final accounting and would get my file to me by the end of that week. I never received the accounting or a bill. Ten days later, on June 24, I asked him to give the files to Kimberly; his answer was that she already had nearly everything, because most of what he had came from her. Kimberly never gave that file, or the recordings, to me. I got only part of it back later, through attorney Darren DeHaven, and other things were missing. Kimberly gave me his number for that text at 8:28 AM that morning.
June 14 and 19, 2022: fired, then his motion to withdraw
On Sunday, June 19, 2022 at 8:15 PM, five days after I fired him, Attorney Chapman filed a one-paragraph motion to withdraw. Its only ground: "It has come to the attention of attorney representing Defendant that the Defendant desires Attorney John Chapman to withdraw as attorney of record." It is signed "Attorney for Plaintiff." Its certificate says it "was sent to Plaintiff," my ex-husband, "on this 18th day of June." It does not say it was sent to me.
After I lost my kids, Kimberly told me to tell him he was fired. I did, by text, on June 14, 2022 at 2:51 PM: "I am terminating our arrangement for representation." That is the "desire" his motion refers to. He did not choose to leave; the decision came from the lawyer who had hired and paid him, and his motion came five days after he was fired. Attorney Chapman never told me he was filing it, and after I fired him I never received the final accounting he said he had prepared, a bill, or a letter. His file went to Kimberly at my request on June 24, and she never gave it to me.
The court's local rule says that once a lawyer has appeared, he is not "relieved of responsibility" unless he files a motion and proposed order "stating the grounds," with "a proper certification that counsel has notified the client of all subsequent hearing dates and the necessity for attendance at same, and has served both the client and opposing counsel with the motion to withdraw." Then the withdrawing lawyer must mail a copy of the court's order to all parties and counsel (Summit DR Loc.R. 24.01(A)–(B), as currently published). When he filed, a motion hearing was already set for July 22, 2022, and an initial hearing for June 27. I have not found an order on the docket granting or denying that motion. By July 12, 2022 the court's notices went to Kimberly Valenti and Darren DeHaven, not to him. Ohio's ethics rules say a withdrawing lawyer must get the court's permission where the court requires it, and must take steps to protect the client, including "giving due notice to the client" and "delivering to the client all papers and property to which the client is entitled" (Prof.Cond.R. 1.16(c), (d)).
What he did do
To be fair, the record also shows work. On May 19, 2022 he met with Lt. Dan Rice of the Sagamore Hills Police Department, raised his concern that my ex-husband had already violated the protection order after being served on May 9, and brought phone records for the police to follow up (Sagamore Hills PD incident 22-00116, report dated 5/24/2022). Kimberly gave him those phone records, and everything else he had about my case. He had never spoken to me; he was working only from what Kimberly handed him. He said so himself on June 24, 2022: "Most of what I have are copies I got from her." On May 23, 2022 at 3:55 PM the police logged a request from "Attorney John Chapman and female" for an escort to the house; that was me, with him. He tried the May 20, 2022 hearing, cross-examined all eight of the other side's witnesses, and questioned me and Officer Roxbury. He filed my answer and counterclaim on June 13, asking that I be named residential parent. He co-signed the May 19 reply asking the court to strike my ex-husband's emergency and contempt motions, and the May 23 motion asking the court to hold my ex-husband in contempt for violating the protection order. And he filed the June 9 emergency motion arguing that I had done nothing more than use the protection order the court gave me.
Evidence timeline
- May 9, 2022Ex parte protection order journalized: my sons and I are protected, and I am given temporary custody. My ex-husband's lawyers file an emergency motion the same day. DR-2022-05-1201; docket
- By May 20, 2022Kimberly Valenti tells me she can't represent me because of a conflict from her friendship with Judge Steinhauer, and that is why she hires and pays Attorney Chapman ($500). She tells me not to tell him anything and to speak to no one. Recollection
- May 14–15, 2022Notice of appearance as my co-counsel, signed "Attorney for Plaintiff"; certificate says it was sent "to Defendant." Exh. C-1, C-2
- May 19, 2022He meets Lt. Dan Rice of the Sagamore Hills police about possible protection-order violations and brings phone records that Kimberly Valenti gave him. He has never spoken to me. SHPD incident 22-00116
- May 19, 2022, 11:42 PMFiled before he had ever spoken to me: Joint reply with Kimberly Valenti asking the court to strike my ex-husband's motions. His pre-hearing statement and witness list are filed the same day (not viewable online). Docket
- May 20, 2022I meet and speak with Attorney Chapman for the first time, at his office. He drives me from there to court; Kimberly Valenti is a half hour late. Full hearing. He questions nearly every witness. No request for an in-chambers interview of my sons or for a guardian ad litem. Closing waived without consulting me. The other side calls eight witnesses; my side calls two. The judge tells my lawyers to "be on the same page." Two of his filings dated May 20 and May 23 are marked "ENTERED IN ERROR" on the docket. Transcript pp. 384–394; Exh. C-7, C-13; docket entries 32–33
- May 23, 2022, 3:55 PMSagamore Hills police log "Attorney John Chapman and female requesting escort to residence." That was me, with him. SHPD CAD log
- May 23, 2022Motion for contempt with Kimberly Valenti. It names the wrong party in three places. Exh. C-3, C-4
- June 8, 2022Custody of my sons goes to my ex-husband. The order notes no in-camera interview and no guardian ad litem. Exh. C-5, C-6, C-8
- June 9, 2022, 11:57 PMHis motion to stay and modify custody. Certificate says it was "sent to Defendant." He never told me he was filing it. I have found no ruling. Exh. C-9, C-10
- June 9, 2022My ex-husband's lawyers move to make me disclose my sons' location and deliver them. Apart from his stay motion, no response from Attorney Chapman appears on the docket. Docket entry 37
- June 11, 2022My sons are returned to their father while the stay motion is pending. Timeline
- June 12–13, 2022Kimberly: "make sure you put both case numbers per Attorney Chapman." Four affidavits (not viewable online) and my answer and counterclaim (4:04 PM) filed in my name, when I was in no state to review or agree to anything; I was traumatized. Guardian ad litem Brendon Kohrs appointed. Me, 1:41 PM: "What time we meeting with the new lawyer?" and "And I assume I'm not meeting with Chapman now." iMessage; docket
- June 14, 2022, 9:31 AMOrder granting the motion to disclose location "upon written motion," copied to him and Kimberly Valenti. Exh. C-14
- June 13, 2022, 10:56 AMKimberly texts me his phone number; until then I did not have it. I text him: "Hi what time are we meeting and where." No reply in the thread. iMessage
- June 14, 2022, 2:51–6:10 PMKimberly tells me to tell him he's fired, and I do: I text him that I am "terminating our arrangement for representation" and ask for a final accounting. He replies that he doesn't have my name attached to my number and doesn't know which case I mean; then that he has "prepared my final accounting" and will "box up your file and will provide everything to you by the end of the week." I never receive the accounting. iMessage
- June 19, 2022, 8:15 PMFive days after he was fired, he files a motion to withdraw; certificate says it was "sent to Plaintiff." He never told me he was filing it, and he never sent me a bill or a letter. Exh. C-11, C-12
- June 22, 2022Darren DeHaven appears as my co-counsel. Docket
- June 24, 2022, 9:03 AMI ask him to give the files, including all recordings, to Kimberly. He: "Most of what I have are copies I got from her." Kimberly never gives the file to me; I later get only part of it back through Darren DeHaven, with other things missing. iMessage; recollection
- July 12, 2022"Judgment Entry: Defendant's Motions" (not viewable online; requested). Notices no longer go to Attorney Chapman. No order on his motion to withdraw found. Docket; notices
What I believe was violated
Each item below is what I believe the documents show.
| Rule or law | What I believe the record shows | When | Evidence |
|---|---|---|---|
| Prof.Cond.R. 1.1 (competence), 1.3 (diligence): accuracy of filings | Signed "Attorney for Plaintiff" while representing me, on three filings. The contempt motion names my ex-husband as the protected person and me as the one in "willful disregard" of the order. His contact details are listed inconsistently. | 5/15, 5/23, 6/9, 6/19/2022 | Exh. C-1, C-3, C-4, C-9, C-11 |
| Civ.R. 5(B)(1), (B)(4); Summit DR Loc.R. 2.08(A): service on opposing counsel | The certificates on his notice of appearance and his emergency stay motion say they were "sent to Defendant," his own client, not to my ex-husband's lawyers. Under Civ.R. 5(B)(4), a filing "shall not be considered until proof of service is endorsed thereon." | 5/15/2022; 6/9/2022 | Exh. C-2, C-10 |
| Prof.Cond.R. 1.3 (diligence), 1.4(a)(3) (keeping the client informed): the stay motion | The one emergency motion that might have kept my sons with me was never ruled on, as far as I can find. I have no record that he asked for the hearing it requested before I fired him at Kimberly's direction on June 14. | 6/9–6/14/2022 | Docket; Exh. C-9, C-10 |
| Prof.Cond.R. 1.1, 1.3; R.C. 3109.04(B)(1): my sons' voices | No request for an in-chambers interview, which the statute says the court "shall" grant on a party's request, and no request for a guardian ad litem before custody was decided. Kimberly Valenti shared this responsibility. | 5/20/2022 hearing | Transcript; Exh. C-5, C-6 |
| Prof.Cond.R. 1.2(a), 1.4(a)(2) (consulting the client about means): waiving closing | Waived closing argument in the hearing that decided custody. He did not check with me first. | 5/20/2022 | Exh. C-7 |
| Prof.Cond.R. 1.16(c), (d); 5.4(c); Summit DR Loc.R. 24.01: his filing after he was fired | He did not choose to withdraw: on June 14, at Kimberly's direction, I fired him. His June 19 motion gave a one-line ground ("the Defendant desires…") and was served only on "Plaintiff." He never told me he was filing it. On June 14 he wrote that he would provide my file to me by the end of that week; on June 24 I asked him to give it to Kimberly instead, and she never passed it on to me. No certification that he told me about the June 27 and July 22 hearings, or that he served me. No order on his motion to withdraw found. The firing came at Kimberly Valenti's direction. | 6/19/2022 | Exh. C-11, C-12; docket |
| Prof.Cond.R. 1.1 (competence), 1.3 (diligence): presenting my case | At the hearing that decided custody, the other side called eight witnesses and offered exhibits numbered 1 through 10; my side called two witnesses and offered four exhibits, three of them court records offered at the end with no testimony. He did not object to most of their exhibits. The judge told my two lawyers they had to "be on the same page." | 5/20/2022 | Transcript pp. 261–346, 384–392; Exh. C-13 |
| Prof.Cond.R. 1.3 (diligence): the motion to disclose my location | Apart from his stay motion, no response to my ex-husband's June 9 motion appears on the docket. It was granted June 14 "upon written motion," and the order was copied to him. | 6/9–6/14/2022 | Docket entries 37, 62; Exh. C-14 |
| Prof.Cond.R. 1.5(b) (communicating scope and fee) | No engagement letter, and no written statement of his fee or scope, was ever given to me. He never sent me a bill or a letter, and I never received the "final accounting" he texted me on June 14, 2022 that he had prepared. | May 2022 onward | Gmail, Dropbox and bank records searched |
| Prof.Cond.R. 1.8(f), 1.7(a)(2), 5.4(c): hired, paid and directed by another lawyer | Kimberly Valenti hired and paid him. I was never asked for informed consent. She told me not to tell him anything, and she told me to fire him. His judgment and his relationship with me ran through the lawyer who paid him. | May 14 – June 14, 2022 | His appearance, co-signed filings and motion to withdraw |
| Prof.Cond.R. 1.4(a)(1)–(3), (b) (communication) | I first met and spoke with him the day of the hearing he tried; his witness list was filed the night before. He never told me he was filing the June 9 stay motion and never told me about his June 19 motion. No emails. I did not have his phone number until Kimberly texted it to me on June 13, 2022, and on June 14 he did not have my name attached to my number or know which case I meant. Kimberly told me not to tell him anything. | May 19 – June 14, 2022 | iMessage 6/12–6/13/2022; Gmail (none found) |
| Prof.Cond.R. 1.4(b), 1.1, 3.3(a): affidavits filed in my name | Four sworn affidavits, and my answer and counterclaim, filed in my name on June 13, 2022, when I was in no state to review or agree to anything; I was traumatized. Counsel drafted them. I still have not been able to read the affidavits. | 6/13/2022 | Docket ("not viewable online"; requested) |
What it cost: time, money, resources
| Item | Amount | Date | Source |
|---|---|---|---|
| Fee paid to Attorney Chapman by Kimberly Valenti, not by me. Kimberly told me she paid him $500. | $500 (paid by Kimberly Valenti) | May–June 2022 | Kimberly told me. No payment by me found in my Chase business statements (May–July 2022), Gmail, PayPal or Dropbox |
| Cost of replacing him: Darren DeHaven's firm, which appeared June 22, 2022 | See the costs and time page | 2022–2023 | DeHaven invoices |
| Time: the full-day May 20, 2022 hearing he tried (394-page transcript) | 1 hearing day | 5/20/2022 | Transcript |
The case as a whole has cost me far more than money. I now have psychogenic seizures, caused by the extreme trauma of litigation abuse and losing my children overnight. But this page counts only what connects to this one lawyer.
The rules and laws, in their own words
- Ohio Rules of Professional Conduct (Supreme Court of Ohio): Rules 1.1, 1.2, 1.3, 1.4, 1.5(b), 1.7, 1.8(f), 1.16, 3.3, 5.4(c)
- Ohio Rules of Civil Procedure: Civ.R. 5(B) (service on the attorney; proof of service)
- Summit County Domestic Relations Court, Rules of Practice and Procedure: Loc.R. 2.08(A) (certification of service on opposing counsel), 24.01 (withdrawal of counsel)
- R.C. 3109.04: allocation of parental rights; in-chambers interviews (B)
- R.C. 3113.31: domestic violence civil protection orders
- Ohio Office of Disciplinary Counsel
Children's names, birthdates, schools and addresses are redacted from every exhibit. Exhibits are excerpts. Full copies are kept for counsel and the appropriate authorities.