Submitted September 13, 2017
Certified Report by the Board of Professional Conduct of the
Supreme Court, No. 2016-016.
J. Drexel, Disciplinary Counsel, and Donald M. Scheetz,
Assistant Disciplinary Counsel, for relator.
Michelle Lynn DeMasi, pro se.
1} Respondent, Michelle Lynn DeMasi, whose last
known address was in Akron, Ohio, Attorney Registration No.
0078628, was admitted to the practice of law in Ohio by
motion in 2005.
2} On April 29, 2016, relator, disciplinary counsel,
filed a complaint charging DeMasi with multiple violations of
the Rules of Professional Conduct arising from her conduct as
the defendant in a debt-collection proceeding and her
representation of a single client. Because DeMasi did not
answer the complaint or respond to a show-cause order, we
imposed an interim default suspension under Gov.Bar R.
V(14)(B)(1) on August 4, 2016. 147 Ohio St.3d 1211,
2016-Ohio-5220, 63 N.E.3d 133. After DeMasi responded to an
order to show cause why her interim default suspension should
not be converted to an indefinite suspension, we remanded the
matter to the Board of Professional Conduct for consideration
of mitigating evidence only. 148 Ohio St.3d 1438,
2017-Ohio-1345, 72 N.E.3d 653.
3} DeMasi is deemed to have committed the charged
ethical violations by virtue of her default and failure to
timely move this court for leave to answer the charges
against her. See Gov.Bar R. V(14)(A) and (C). After
a hearing at which DeMasi testified regarding certain factors
that she believed to be mitigating, a panel of the board
recommended that she be indefinitely suspended from the
practice of law. The panel also recommended that DeMasi
receive no credit for the time served under her interim
default suspension and that she be required to satisfy
certain conditions before being reinstated to the practice of
4} The board adopted the panel's findings and
recommended sanction. We adopt the board's report in its
entirety and indefinitely suspend DeMasi from the practice of
law with no credit for time served under her interim default
5} The first count of the complaint arises from
DeMasi's refusal to participate in a judgment-debtor
examination after the Barberton Municipal Court granted
summary judgment to one of her creditors. She was held in
contempt of court and jailed when she disobeyed the
judge's orders to answer the questions posed to her. The
court agreed to release DeMasi the next day based on her
agreement to participate in the debtor's exam. But
following her release, she filed an affidavit of
disqualification against the judge (which was later denied)
and once again failed to appear for the debtor's exam.
6} When a bailiff served DeMasi with an order to
show cause why she should not be held in contempt of court,
she exited her home, stood in the path of the bailiffs
vehicle, and refused to move. Local police responded and
placed DeMasi in the back of a patrol car. From there, she
called 9-1-1 to report that she was being kidnapped. As a
result of her conduct, she was charged with obstruction of
official business. She also was served with a second notice
of her upcoming contempt hearing.
7} DeMasi appeared to be arraigned on her criminal
charge on April 23, 2015, and her arraignment was
rescheduled. On that same date, she unsuccessfully sought a
writ of prohibition to prevent the judge in the underlying
civil case from taking further action and was served with a
third notice of the contempt hearing, which was scheduled for
the following day. Falsely claiming ...