Complaint Review Committee adopts sanctions in multiple process-server cases; several permanent revocations recommended

The Complaint Review Committee met remotely and, after considering investigative reports, witness statements and video evidence, voted on a series of disciplinary recommendations for certified process servers with outcomes that include recommended permanent revocations, administrative penalties and one probated suspension.

The committee’s work matters because process servers are entrusted with delivering court papers that begin legal proceedings; inaccurate returns or false affidavits can affect case outcomes and defendants’ rights. The committee considered officer returns, videos from doorbell cameras, vendor records submitted by ABC Legal, and statements from respondents and complainants before voting.

The committee adopted the staff or prosecutor recommendations in most matters it considered, including motions to recommend permanent revocation and monetary penalties in several cases. In one contested matter the committee modified the staff recommendation: in the case of respondent Ezekiel “Zeke” Zeke, the panel instead issued a written reprimand, placed the certification on a probated suspension through April 30, 2026, and required completion of a precertification civil-process education course during the probation period; the committee removed the allegation that had sought revocation and eliminated the recommended financial penalty in that case.

Notable items discussed:

- Evidence review: The committee played and examined doorbell-camera videos and vendor records in cases where video evidence was available. Staff and panel members repeatedly noted gaps in video/audio evidence and questioned whether ABC Legal or other third‑party vendor records were sworn or complete. Panel members emphasized that their standard of proof is a preponderance of the evidence, not proof beyond a reasonable doubt.

- Vendor records and GPS: Committee members questioned the reliability of vendor-supplied GPS metadata and other third‑party evidence when timestamps, missing footage, or unexplained offsets appeared in vendor files.

- Sanction matrix and discretion: Members cited the committee’s sanction matrix as guidance but repeatedly noted the matrix is advisory; the committee modified recommended sanctions in multiple cases based on the respondent’s history, the strength of evidence, and whether errors appeared to be inadvertent or deliberate.

Votes at a glance (case — allegation — committee action): - Cause 0635 (Christy Mains v. Gabriel Hasbon) — alleged false return of service — Committee voted to adopt prosecutor’s recommendation: staff recommended permanent revocation and a $1,250 administrative penalty (recommendation adopted by the committee; final action by the full commission pending). - Cause 0638 (Carol Lombardino v. Gabriel Hasbon) — alleged false return of service — Committee voted to adopt prosecutor’s recommendation: staff recommended permanent revocation and a $1,450 administrative penalty (adopted; final commission action pending). - Cause 0646 (Ernest West v. Jesse Villarreal) — alleged false return of service — Committee voted to adopt prosecutor’s recommendation: staff recommended permanent revocation and a $1,700 administrative penalty (3 ayes, 0 nays; motion passed; final commission action pending). - Cause 0664 (Sean Hollenbeck v. Melanie Guley) — alleged unresponsiveness and conflicting refund information — Committee adopted the prosecutor’s recommended violations and sanctions as presented (staff recommended a sanction totaling about $19,500; committee adopted the recommendation; final commission action pending). - Cause 0676 (Richard Hubbard v. Alyssa/Alisa Wilson) — alleged false return / service not personal — Committee adopted the prosecutor’s recommended violations and sanctions (staff recommended permanent revocation or refusal to renew and a financial penalty listed in the investigative summary; committee adopted the recommendation; final commission action pending). - Cause 0685 (Tamara Donahue v. Ezekiel “Zeke” Zeke) — alleged false return / taped documents to door — Staff recommended permanent revocation and a monetary penalty. The committee modified the recommendation: it found a violation of the requirement to provide an accurate return (code of ethics 2a), issued a letter of reprimand, placed the certification on a probated suspension through April 30, 2026, and required completion of the precertification civil-process education course during the probation period. The panel removed the more serious misconduct findings and did not impose the staff‑recommended monetary penalty; the committee’s motion passed. - Cause 0695 (Kimberly O’Dell v. Eloy Bravo) — alleged unprofessional/disrespectful email conduct — Staff recommended a reprimand and a $500 penalty; the committee reduced the monetary penalty and adopted a reprimand with an administrative penalty of $250 due within six months (motion passed; final commission action pending). - Cause 0706 (Vicki Wilkes v. Irene Acantola) — alleged false return and video evidence showing a male placing documents — Committee adopted the prosecutor’s recommended violations and sanction: staff recommended permanent revocation and a $1,250 penalty (adopted; final commission action pending). - Cause 0707 (Kara Jones v. Omotoso) — alleged false return (served son instead of defendant) and inaccurate description — Committee adopted the prosecutor’s recommended violations and sanction (staff recommended permanent revocation and a $1,250 penalty; adopted; final commission action pending). - Cause 0719 (Timothy J. Mendolia v. Michael Ward) — alleged false affidavit and signing in a judge’s signature line — Staff recommended a reprimand for a 2(a) violation. The committee adopted a reprimand and added a $100 administrative penalty to be paid within six months; the motion passed.

Panel members said they would forward the committee’s recommendations to the full commission, which holds final authority. Committee members repeatedly reminded respondents that the committee’s findings are recommendations and that respondents will receive formal notice of findings and may contest or appeal final orders under the commission’s procedures.

Several respondents who addressed the committee apologized or explained their account. Ezekiel Zeke read a prepared statement in which he apologized and asked the panel to reduce the sanction; the committee granted a more lenient sanction than staff recommended in his case. Other respondents either did not attend or declined to add new material beyond previously submitted investigative responses.

The committee also discussed training: members recommended re-education for respondents whose cases suggested a gap in understanding court orders and substituted‑service rules. The committee asked staff to consider how precertification and renewal education could better emphasize ethics and substituted-service orders.

The committee adjourned after completing the agenda. The full commission will consider these recommendations at a later meeting; respondents will receive notice of the committee’s findings and instructions for contesting or appealing the proposed sanctions.