Lisa Carey Dean

Lisa Carey Dean has been my ex-husband's lawyer in my divorce and custody case, Summit County Domestic Relations Court, DR-2022-03-0667, since he filed it on March 21, 2022. In July 2025 she also filed her own sworn petition for a civil stalking protection order against me (Dean v. George, Summit County Common Pleas, CV-2025-07-3265). She is now on the November 3, 2026 ballot for Summit County Domestic Relations Judge. This page puts what she wrote and swore next to the records that contradict it.

If you're a Democrat, DO NOT vote for Lisa Dean. If you're a Republican or an independent, PLEASE VOTE FOR KATARINA COOK. If you want to know who has integrity in Ohio, connect with me directly.

1. Who she is, and how she came into my case

Lisa Carey Dean is a lawyer at Roderick Linton Belfance in Akron and the law director of the City of Green. Her sworn petition says: "I am the legal counsel for [my ex-husband] in his domestic relations matter in Summit County, Ohio and have been since the beginning of 2022" (petition ¶1). She is the Democratic candidate for Summit County Domestic Relations Judge, for a term that begins January 4, 2027 (Summit County Board of Elections candidate list, 2/4/26). Her campaign committee is "Lisa Dean for Judge."

• March 21, 2022My ex-husband filed for divorce, five weeks after his arrest for domestic violence against me. She signed his filings. docket
• May 13, 2022A week after a magistrate gave me a protection order and custody of my sons, she filed a motion asking that I be held in contempt (section 4). motion, 5/13/22
• May 1, 2023Susan Steinhauer, the judge who made the June 8, 2022 order that took my sons, joined her firm. My lawyers moved to disqualify the firm; the motion was denied on July 20, 2023. See the Judge Steinhauer page. docket
• March 5 to June 26, 2024I had no lawyer. The court granted my lawyer's motion to withdraw on March 5, 2024, and my next lawyer appeared on June 26, 2024. During that time she wrote to me directly, including her April 1, 2024 settlement proposal and her May 2 and June 6, 2024 letters. JE 3/5/24; her letters
• May 2, 2024Her letter to me: "we have instructed our client that he is NOT to send the children for their parenting time with you, pending further Order from the Court" (section 5). letter, 5/2/24
• July 9, 2024She wrote to my lawyer that my ex-husband was "willing to waive the retroactivity of the child support obligation." The decree filed July 17, 2024 says support is "Effective March 21, 2022." See the Joseph Pfundstein page. letter, 7/9/24; decree
• November 18, 2024Her letter to me: "Because you have been contacting me directly, I assume you no longer have legal counsel." letter, 11/18/24
• July 17, 2025She filed her sworn petition against me, eight days before a hearing in my divorce case on July 25, 2025 (petition ¶19). She kept representing my ex-husband against me in the divorce case after filing it (magistrate's order, ¶15). petition; order, 3/12/26
• July 24, 2025A sheriff's deputy served me with her petition at my door, the day before my trial. doorbell video

• October 31, 2025She testified at the full hearing on her petition. transcript, Vol. 1
• March 12, 2026A magistrate granted her a one-year civil stalking protection order. I filed objections on March 30, 2026. order, 3/12/26

2. Her sworn petition, July 17, 2025

She signed the petition under oath. For each paragraph below, I say the statement is false, and the record shows why.

3. Under oath at the hearing, October 31, 2025

She testified as the petitioner before Magistrate Kandi S. O'Connor. Page and line numbers are from the certified transcript, Volume 1.

What she told law enforcement

Her petition says: "I contacted local law enforcement to request support and assistance" (¶35), and that she planned "to have a law enforcement escort me to and from the courthouse" for the July 25, 2025 hearing (¶19). At the hearing she said she reported me to a captain of the county sheriff's office in July 2025, and that it was her only report. She agreed she was reporting to her "friend in the sheriff's office" and that she has a personal relationship with the sheriff. She first said, "I made a report. They would have prepared an incident report. I don't have it with me. I don't know what it says," and then, "A written report or statement, no." (Vol. 1, 155:9–157:13; 160:3–22; order ¶14)

I have never been contacted by the sheriff's office or any other police agency about anything she has alleged (Vol. 2, 285:14–286:12). I have not found a written report by her. What she told the sheriff about the courthouse and about the January 2, 2025 event is the same story as petition ¶21–25 above, and the record contradicts it in the same places.

4. In my divorce case: to the court and to my lawyers

5. What she did

6. Her other accusations, answered

Each row gives her claim in one line, then what the record shows.

7. Candidates night, October 14, 2026

A week before the Greenwood Village Candidates Night, the campaign I volunteer for sent a group text reminding volunteers that the event was "Wednesday, October 14, at 7:00 pm. Please arrive on time." I went because the campaign asked me to. That morning I emailed the association to ask for the guest list and the flyer. I did not get a reply.

The printed program handed out that night lists every race and every candidate. Ms. Dean is not on it, and it lists no Domestic Relations race. (Its footer says not all candidate information was in by the newsletter deadline.)

Ms. Dean stayed in the parking lot. Officers were told she "won't come in the room unless there's law enforcement because of the issues in the past." The officers then decided I had to leave and told me so. I left calmly. On camera they said I was "handling it the right way." No citation, no arrest, no violation. Under oath on October 31, 2025, Ms. Dean said: "She didn't threaten me" (Vol. 1, 153:15–17).

What I believe was violated

In my divorce case she was a lawyer speaking for her client, so the rules on candor to the court apply directly. In her own petition and testimony she was a party, and Rule 8.4(c) applies to a lawyer's dishonesty whether or not she is acting for a client.

I also believe her continuing to represent my ex-husband against me while she was the petitioner against me (item 19) raises a conflict under Prof.Cond.R. 1.7, and that stopping court-ordered parenting time by letter (item 18) was conduct prejudicial to the administration of justice under Prof.Cond.R. 8.4(d).

Protections I was owed

I am a domestic violence survivor and a crime victim. On February 15, 2022 the police arrested my ex-husband for domestic violence against me, and their report says "Victim's assistance information was provided to Careyann" (report 22-00040). On May 6, 2022 a magistrate heard my petition for a domestic violence civil protection order, and the order filed May 9 gave me sole custody of my sons. Below is each protection I believe I was owed, in the law's own words, what Lisa Dean did that I believe violated it, and how Summit County, by its courts and officials, let it happen. This is my position. No court has ruled on it. My full Marsy's Law account, and the prosecutor's part in it, is on the Summit County Prosecutor page.

1. Marsy's Law: Ohio Constitution, Article I, Section 10a

What it guarantees. A victim has the right "(1) to be treated with fairness and respect for the victim's safety, dignity and privacy;" "(4) to reasonable protection from the accused or any person acting on behalf of the accused;" "(6) … to refuse an interview, deposition, or other discovery request made by the accused or any person acting on behalf of the accused;" and "(8) to proceedings free from unreasonable delay and a prompt conclusion of the case." Section 10a(B) lets a victim assert these rights "in any proceeding involving the criminal offense … or in which the victim's rights are implicated."

• What she did. She acted for the accused. Four days after my protection order was filed she asked the court to hold me in contempt and complained that I "refused to disclose the location of the children" (5/13/22). On June 9, 2022 her office moved again to make me disclose where my sons were. She noticed my deposition at her own offices for March 21, 2024, while I had no lawyer (her letters of 3/19/24 and 4/3/24). In 2024 her letter stopped my parenting time for 87 days with no hearing and no order, and what her motion started has left my sons without free access to me for nearly 2.5 years (item 18).
• How Summit County failed. I found no order in my divorce case that addressed my rights as a crime victim. The court did not rule on her May 2, 2024 motion, or on my May 2024 contempt motions about the missed time, before the July 10, 2024 settlement; her own June 6, 2024 letter says, "We fully expected the Court to schedule a hearing on our motion, but that has not happened." The prosecutor's office gave me no written reply to my request to be heard (see the prosecutor page).

2. Ohio's victims' rights law: R.C. Chapter 2930

What it guarantees. R.C. 2930.07(B): a victim has "the right at any court proceeding, including any juvenile court proceeding, not to testify regarding the victim's address, telephone number, place of employment, or other locating information unless the victim specifically consents or the court determines that the fundamental demands of due process of law in the fair administration of criminal justice prevails." R.C. 2930.06 requires the prosecutor to confer with the victim, on request, before a negotiated plea.

• What she did. Her May 13, 2022 and June 9, 2022 motions were built on my not giving my ex-husband my location while I was protected from him. My lawyers wrote in May 2022 that her contempt motion was filed "in an ongoing effort to harass [me] and to ascertain [my] location."
• How Summit County failed. The divorce court took up her location motions without any reference to my rights as a victim that I can find. The plea in the criminal case was taken while I was not there (see the prosecutor page).

3. The domestic violence civil protection order: R.C. 3113.31

What it guarantees. A court may "temporarily allocate parental rights and responsibilities for the care of, or establish temporary parenting time rights with regard to, minor children" (R.C. 3113.31(E)(1)(d)). My order did that: "[Carey Ann] shall be sole custodial parent." It also said: "RESPONDENT SHALL NOT CAUSE OR ENCOURAGE ANY PERSON to do any act prohibited by this Order," and law enforcement was "ordered to assist Petitioner in gaining physical custody of the children, if necessary."

• What she did. On May 9, 2022, the day he learned of the order at his lawyer's office, her office filed an emergency motion for custody, without telling the court about the order, my lawyers said (item 23). On May 13 she filed for contempt against me, the protected person, for keeping my sons where the order allowed (items 13 and 21). My lawyers asked that his counsel "be admonished for any assistance they provided the Respondent aiding and abetting this violation the Order of Protection."
• How Summit County failed. The court did not sign the May 9 emergency motion. But on June 8, 2022 it gave him temporary custody and ordered: "It is NOT violation of that Order to return the children to [him]," and the full protection order "defers to this Order and case for issues dealing with custody and parenting time." My sons were protected persons in my ex parte order, and they were sent to live with the man it protected them from.

4. Custody law must weigh domestic violence: R.C. 3109.04 and 3109.051

What it guarantees. In deciding custody the court "shall consider all relevant factors," including whether either parent "has been convicted of or pleaded guilty to a violation of section 2919.25 of the Revised Code" (domestic violence) or "any offense involving a victim who … was a member of the family or household … and caused physical harm to the victim" (R.C. 3109.04(F)(1)(h)); whether the residential parent "has continuously and willfully denied the other parent's right to parenting time in accordance with an order of the court" ((F)(1)(i)); and, for shared parenting, "Any history of, or potential for, child abuse, spouse abuse, other domestic violence, or parental kidnapping by either parent" ((F)(2)(c)). Under R.C. 3109.04(C), a parent with such a conviction may be named residential parent "only if" the court "makes specific written findings of fact to support its determination." For parenting time, the court must weigh "Each parent's willingness to reschedule missed parenting time and to facilitate the other parent's parenting time rights" (R.C. 3109.051(D)(10)).

• What she did. She turned the domestic violence case around: her motions in May 2022 cast my leaving under a protection order as hiding my sons, and in 2025 she testified that I had "absconded with the children" (item 20). In 2024 her letter told her client to deny my court-ordered parenting time, which is the very thing (F)(1)(i) and 3109.051(D)(10) count against a parent (item 18).
• How Summit County failed. The June 8, 2022 order recited these factors, then treated February 15, 2022 as one event and found "Wife was uninjured." He had pleaded to a reduced charge of disorderly conduct, so the domestic violence conviction that would have triggered R.C. 3109.04(C) never existed. He was still on probation for that incident when the court gave him custody. In 2024 the court let her letter's denial of my parenting time stand for weeks without a hearing.

5. Civil stalking protection orders and their limits: R.C. 2903.214

What it guarantees. An order under R.C. 2903.214 requires a violation of R.C. 2903.211: "No person by engaging in a pattern of conduct shall knowingly cause another person to believe that the offender will cause physical harm to the other person … or cause mental distress." A "pattern of conduct" means "two or more actions or incidents closely related in time" (R.C. 2903.211(D)(1)). The order is for "the safety and protection of the person to be protected" (R.C. 2903.214(E)(1)(a)). In my view it is not a tool for one side's lawyer to use against the other side.

• What she did. While still representing the man I hold a domestic violence protection order against, she swore out a petition against me, filed eight days before a hearing in his case (item 19). Under oath she agreed I never threatened her physically, and she said she made no report about me to any police agency before July 2025 (items 2 and 10). At that hearing, answering a yes-or-no question about her divorce decree, she also brought up that "she had filed a protective order" against her client (Vol. 1, 12:8–9).
• How Summit County failed. On March 12, 2026 the magistrate found a "pattern of conduct" in two incidents "separated as they were by a period of only five months," said "neither in the August 5, 2024 email nor at the January 2, 2025 swearing-in ceremony did Respondent explicitly threaten Petitioner," and granted the order anyway on her fear. When my lawyer objected to her bringing up my protection order, the court said, "I will allow it. Overruled." (Vol. 1, 12:10–18).

6. The right not to have my survivor status used against me

What it guarantees. No single statute says this in these words. I rely on Marsy's Law's guarantee of "fairness and respect for the victim's safety, dignity and privacy," on R.C. 3113.31, which made seeking protection a lawful act with custody attached, and on Prof.Cond.R. 4.4(a) below.

• What she did. Seeking protection became, in her filings, contempt (5/13/22), "absconded" (10/31/25), and "she had filed a protective order" as part of the history of her own stalking case (10/31/25). In 2024 a worried call from my mother became the reason my sons were kept from me (item 22).
• How Summit County failed. The court let each of these stand. It allowed her testimony about my protection order over objection, and it never ruled on the 2024 motion that her letter had already put into effect.

7. Lawyers' duties to the other side: Prof.Cond.R. 4.4(a), 8.4(d) and 3.4

What it guarantees. Rule 4.4(a): "In representing a client, a lawyer shall not use means that have no substantial purpose other than to embarrass, harass, delay, or burden a third person, or use methods of obtaining evidence that violate the legal rights of such a person." Rule 8.4(d): a lawyer shall not "engage in conduct that is prejudicial to the administration of justice." Rule 3.4(c): a lawyer shall not "knowingly disobey an obligation under the rules of a tribunal, except for an open refusal based on a good faith assertion that no valid obligation exists."

• What she did. Her May 2, 2024 letter: "we have instructed our client that he is NOT to send the children for their parenting time with you, pending further Order from the Court," against a standing order that gave me every Wednesday and every other weekend (item 18). A contempt motion against the protected party four days into my protection order (item 13). A stalking petition filed while she was opposing counsel, eight days before a hearing in his case (item 19).
• How Summit County failed. My May 29, 2024 contempt motion attached her letter and said, "the Plaintiff's Counsel advised her client to disregard a court order." The court issued show-cause orders but did not rule on the contempt before the July 10, 2024 settlement. Her firm was not disqualified (July 20, 2023), and she kept representing him after filing her own petition (order 3/12/26, ¶15).

The rules and laws, in their own words

• Ohio Rules of Professional Conduct (Supreme Court of Ohio): Rules 1.7, 3.1, 3.3, 3.4, 4.1, 4.2, 4.3, 4.4, 8.4(c), 8.4(d)
• Ohio Constitution, Article I, Section 10a (Marsy's Law)
• R.C. 2930.07 and R.C. 2930.06 (victims' rights)
• R.C. 3113.31 (domestic violence protection orders)
• R.C. 3109.04 and R.C. 3109.051 (custody and parenting time)
• R.C. 2903.211 (menacing by stalking)
• R.C. 2903.214 (civil stalking protection orders)
• Ohio Office of Disciplinary Counsel

Sources

• Dean v. George, CV-2025-07-3265: her sworn petition (7/17/25) ¶1, 5, 6, 19, 21–25, 35; certified hearing transcript, 10/31/25, Vol. 1 and Vol. 2; magistrate's order (3/12/26) ¶14, 15, 20 and pp. 13–14; my objections (3/30/26).
• DR-2022-03-0667: her motion for contempt with my ex-husband's affidavit (5/13/22); order (6/8/22); my lawyers' joint reply (5/19/22); transfer entry (8/22/22); her response in opposition (1/9/23); interim order (1/24/23); her opposition to disqualification with her letter of 5/22/23 (7/20/23); Judge Steinhauer's letter (5/30/23); her motion served on me (8/30/23); JE granting withdrawal (3/5/24); her motion (4/12/24); emergency motion and affidavit (5/2/24); notice of appearance (6/26/24); decree (7/17/24); order (11/13/24).
• Her letters: 3/19/24, 4/1/24, 4/3/24, 5/2/24, 6/6/24, 9/26/24 and 11/18/24 to me; 7/9/24 and 11/20/24 to my lawyer.
• DR-2022-03-0667, more: the protection order filed 5/9/22; my lawyers' pre-hearing statement and motion for contempt (May 2022); her emergency motion, my ex-husband's affidavit and proposed order (5/2/24); my counter-affidavit (5/16/24) and motion for contempt (5/29/24).
• Police: report 22-00040 (2/15/22); call record for 4/22/24 and the records release of 8/19/24.
• Summit County Board of Elections: candidate list (2/4/26); "Lisa Dean for Judge" designation of treasurer filings (1/12/26, 4/22/26, 6/12/26).
• Police report, 5/7/22; the community association's email (12/30/24); the prosecutor's office on Messenger (1/6/25).
• My own records: sent mail to her, 2023–2025; texts to my phone, May 2022; joint tax returns, 2017–2019; ads and message received 7/20/25.

Children's names, birthdates, schools and addresses are left out. Exhibits are excerpts. Full copies are kept for counsel and the appropriate authorities.