BARBARA ELLIOTT YEAGER V. KENTUCKY BAR ASSOCIATION
Annotate this Case
Download PDF
TO BE PUBLISHED
2000-SC-0408-KB
BARBARA ELLIOTT YEAGER
V.
IN SUPREME COURT
KENTUCKY BAR ASSOCIATION
RESPONDENT
OPINION AND ORDER
Movant, Barbara Elliott Yeager, was admitted to the practice of law in this
Commonwealth in October of 1991. On February 16, 2000, the Inquiry Commission
issued a two-count charge against her alleging violations of SCR 3.130-I .4(b) and SCR
3.130-I .7(b). The facts and circumstances which gave rise to these charges resulted
from Yeager’s representation of James Sanders.
In 1983, Yeager began a casual romantic relationship with Sanders. In April or
May of 1995, they began an exclusive, personal relationship. In March of 1996, Yeager
began representing Sanders in his divorce case in Whitley Circuit Court. During this
time period, Yeager represented Sanders in various other cases, including real estate
matters, debt collection cases, and bankruptcy matters.
In 1998, the personal and professional relationship between Yeager and
Sanders ended. At that time, Yeager sent Sanders a legal bill for services she had
performed on his behalf as an attorney for the past three years. On November 20,
1998, Yeager sent Sanders a bill for $213.50. On November 23,1998, Movant sent
Sanders a letter in which she enclosed a copy of an attorney’s lien in the amount of
$47,500.00 that she had filed in the Whitley County Clerk’s office. Finally, on January
6, 1999, Movant sent Sanders a letter in which she attached a statement for all of the
legal representation that she performed for him from 1996-1998. The amount of the bill
was $72,616.00. These were the only bills Yeager provided to Sanders thrqughout the
entire representation. The bills were not provided to him until their personal relationship
ended.
In Count I, the Inquiry Commission charged Yeager with a violation of SCR
3.130-I .4(b) for representing Sanders for three years, yet failing to provide Sanders
with a written bill or sufficient explanation of the charges resulting from her legal
representation of him until after their attorney-client and personal relationship had
ended. SCR 3.130-I .4(b)provides that “A lawyer should explain a matter to the extent
reasonably necessary to permit the client to make informed decisions regarding the
representation.”
In Count II of the charge, the Inquiry Commission charged Yeager with violation
of SCR 3.130-I .7(b), which provides that “A lawyer shall not represent a client if the
representation of that client may be materially limited by the lawyer’s responsibilities to
another client or to a third person, or by the lawyer’s own interests, unless: (1) The
lawyer reasonably believes the representation will not be adversely affected; and (2)
The client consents after consultation.”
Yeager denies her conduct constituted a violation of SCR 3.130-I .7(b), but
admits her behavior constitutes a violation of SCR 3.130-I .4(b), and requests this Court
-2-
I
“”
discipline her by publicly reprimanding her. The Bar Association has no objection to
Yeager’s motion.
Therefore, it is ORDERED that:
1) Movant, Barbara Elliott Yeager, is hereby publicly reprimanded for her
violation of SCR 3.130-I .4(b) as set forth above.
2) In accordance with SCR 3.450(l), Movant is directed to pay all costs
associated with this disciplinary proceeding against her, said sum being $9.04, and for
which execution may issue from this Court upon finality of this order.
All concur.
ENTERED: June 15,200O.
FOR MOVANT:
FOR RESPONDENT:
Robert E. Cato
222 West Fifth Street
London, KY 40741
Bruce K. Davis
Executive Director
Jay R. Garrett
Kentucky Bar Association
514 West Main Street
Frankfort, KY 40601
-3-
Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.