Vermont Court Suspends Addison County Prosecutor's Law License

The Vermont Supreme Court suspended Addison County State’s Attorney Eva Vekos’s law license Friday in a 4-1 ruling, citing her drunken driving conviction as grounds for immediate interim suspension while formal disciplinary proceedings move forward.

Vekos can still hold her elected office. That’s the strange part. Under Vermont state law, a person doesn’t need an active law license to serve as a county state’s attorney, which means Vekos remains in her post despite losing the legal authority to actually practice law. She can’t appear in court, can’t file briefs, and can’t take part in hearings. Her work is now limited to administrative functions.

Tim Lueders-Dumont, executive director of Vermont’s Department of State’s Attorneys and Sheriffs, confirmed the situation Friday afternoon. “She still is state’s attorney,” he said. “She is constitutionally and democratically the state’s attorney, but she cannot perform legal functions of an attorney.” His office, he said, would help cover the prosecution workload. “It’s going to be a group effort.”

The court’s majority found that the circumstances of Vekos’s DUI conviction met the threshold for a “serious crime” under the state’s Professional Responsibility Program Rules, which govern attorney conduct in Vermont. “We conclude that the facts surrounding respondent’s DUI conviction here, taken together, support the conclusion that respondent was convicted of a ‘serious crime’ warranting her immediate interim suspension,” the ruling stated.

Not unanimous.

Justice Christina Nolan dissented, writing that disciplinary counsel had not met the burden of proof required to classify Vekos’s offense as serious under the rules. “In my view,” Nolan wrote, “Disciplinary Counsel has failed to make the requisite demonstration that respondent Eva P. Vekos’s first-time misdemeanor driving under the influence (DUI) conviction is a ‘serious crime’ as that term is uniquely defined by our Professional Responsibility Program Rules.”

The dissent matters because it signals a real legal dispute about how Vermont defines professional misconduct, not a clear-cut case. A first-time misdemeanor DUI sits in genuinely contested territory when it comes to attorney discipline, and Nolan’s opinion will likely give Vekos’s legal team something to work with.

David Sleigh, Vekos’s attorney, said Friday he hadn’t yet read the ruling when reached for comment. “The only thing I can do is say that I’m disappointed, and from our point of view, it’s the cart before the horse,” he said. Sleigh noted that a formal disciplinary petition against Vekos has not yet been filed, making the immediate suspension an unusually aggressive step before proceedings have formally begun.

The ruling followed a hearing last month in which Sleigh and Jon Alexander, counsel for the Vermont Professional Responsibility Board, the state panel overseeing lawyer conduct, argued competing positions on whether and how quickly the suspension should take effect. The court sided with Alexander.

For Addison County, the practical fallout is significant. The state’s attorney’s office prosecutes criminal cases, including felonies, across the county. With Vekos sidelined from courtroom work, the office will depend on outside help to handle an active docket. Lueders-Dumont’s pledge of a coordinated response buys some time, but it’s a patchwork solution for a county that elected Vekos to run its prosecutorial office.

VTDigger first reported the Supreme Court’s Friday ruling and confirmed Vekos could not immediately be reached for comment.

The suspension is interim, tied to ongoing disciplinary proceedings. That process could result in anything from reinstatement to a longer suspension or disbarment depending on what the Professional Responsibility Board ultimately recommends. Vermont’s attorney discipline process allows for several stages of review before any final sanction takes effect.

Whether Vekos can realistically continue to govern the state’s attorney’s office in a meaningful way without practicing law is a question Addison County residents will be watching closely.