On Thursday, March 20, 2025, the Ohio Supreme Court issued a six-month fully stayed suspension from the practice of law to Portsmouth Municipal Court Judge Russell D. Kegley for ethical violations related to his involvement in his son’s legal troubles. The court’s decision followed a complaint from the disciplinary counsel, which detailed Kegley’s actions in securing his son’s release from custody before his initial court appearance on charges of domestic violence and resisting arrest.
The case is entitled “In the Matter of Judge Russell Dee Kegley,” with case number 2024-1721.
Kegley, who has served as a judge since January 2003, was found to have violated several provisions of the Code of Judicial Conduct. The allegations stemmed from an incident on May 25, 2023, when his son, Case Kegley, was arrested for domestic violence after reportedly assaulting his wife, E.K. During the arrest, law enforcement officers struggled to control Case, who was intoxicated, ultimately using a taser to subdue him.
Despite a bond schedule requiring defendants charged with domestic violence to be held without bond until their first court appearance, Kegley intervened after his son called him from jail. Identifying himself as “Judge Kegley,” he contacted jail personnel and instructed them to allow Case to sign his bond, contrary to established procedures. The corrections officer, feeling uncomfortable with Kegley’s directive, sought guidance from a supervisor, who ultimately instructed the officer to comply with Kegley’s request.
As a result, Case Kegley was released on his own recognizance later that same day without notification to the victim, E.K. Upon his return home, E.K. expressed concern, prompting the Scioto County Prosecutor’s Office to request a welfare check, leading to a warrant being issued for Case’s arrest after he failed to appear for his scheduled arraignment.
The Board of Professional Conduct conducted a hearing on the matter, where Kegley was the sole witness. The panel found that Kegley had indeed committed the alleged misconduct and recommended a public reprimand. However, upon the Supreme Court’s review of the board’s report, it was determined that Kegley’s actions warranted a more severe sanction.
The court recognized that Kegley’s misconduct constituted multiple ethical violations, including actions that undermined public confidence in the judiciary and improperly influenced judicial proceedings. Specifically, he was found to have violated rules regarding the abuse of judicial prestige, maintaining impartiality, and avoiding ex parte communications.
In its deliberations, the court noted that while Kegley had a clean disciplinary record and demonstrated cooperation during the proceedings, the gravity of his actions, particularly regarding the safety of E.K., a vulnerable victim, could not be overlooked. The court concluded that a public reprimand would not adequately reflect the seriousness of Kegley’s violations.
Ultimately, the court imposed a six-month suspension from the practice of law, fully stayed on the condition that Kegley engage in no further misconduct during that period. If he fails to comply with the stipulations of the stay, the suspension will be enforced in full.
A copy of the original filing can be found here.
