By Mike Donoghue, Vermont News First
MONTPELIER – The Vermont Supreme Court today issued an interim suspension of the law license held by embattled Addison County State’s Attorney Eva P. Vekos for her failure to respond to questions about her fitness following her arrest on a charge of driving while impaired.
St. Johnsbury Attorney David Sleigh, who represents Vekos, said Wednesday, that he and his client are still willing to cooperate.
Sleigh said Wednesday that after getting the Supreme Court ruling, he emailed disciplinary prosecutor Jon Alexander to ask what information – besides privileged medical records – that he was seeking. Sleigh said he had not heard a response.
The Supreme Court, in its 4-page plus ruling, said the medical records are not the issue. It was an inadequate response in the eyes of the high court.
“We note that this case is not about whether respondent’s medical records should be provided to Disciplinary Counsel. Should a question arise about whether certain records are privileged, the rules provide a process by which issues may be pursued,” the court said.
“The issue here is solely about whether respondent responded to a lawful demand for information under Rule 8.1. She did not,” the order signed by the five justices noted.
Vekos can still serve as Addison County State’s Attorney in a reduced role. Her two deputies would have to appear for court hearings.
The length of the interim suspension is unknown.
Alexander, disciplinary counsel for the Vermont Professional Responsibility Board, began investigating Vekos after learning she had been arrested on a DUI charge after arriving at a homicide scene in Bridport at night. Vermont State Police arrested her and Vekos later pleaded not guilty in Vermont Superior Court.
Alexander asked Sleigh to address the DUI charge and how it bears on her fitness to practice law.
Sleigh provided on Feb. 15 a legal response and a copy of a press release about Vekos taking her medical leave.
The next day Alexander emailed Sleigh requested “relevant health records and (to) perhaps speak to her treaters.” Sleigh did not immediately respond, the court said.
In a follow-up email 10 days later, Alexander said he might seek the interim suspension for failure to cooperate. Sleigh responded Vekos “plans on returning to work soon” and “there’s no reason for you to examine her health records or speak to her treaters” because “she has no mental or physical issues that would impede her ability to practice law.”
The response was not good enough for Alexander. He pushed for “an explanation and related documentation of the medical reasons for the leave,” the court noted. Alexander also wanted a clarification about how soon Vekos would be back to work.
Alexander said he might contact medical providers used by Vekos.
Sleigh said attempted to have the inquiry moved to Vermont Superior Court where the legal process could play out and a judge could make a ruling. Sleigh’s petition to the Vermont Supreme Court seeking the transfer was rejected by Associate Justice Karen Carroll without comment.
The whole court later held a hearing on the case a week ago.