CHARLESTON —The West Virginia Judicial Investigation Commission (JIC) has cleared a Williamson attorney of any wrongdoing in a case involving the Mingo County Commission.

The complaint by Mingo Commissioner David Baisden was originally filed with the Office of Disciplinary Counsel, but was referred to the JIC because Chafin sits on the State Bar Board of Governors.

In the complaint, Baisden said attorney Letitia Chafin had represented in personal matters as well as an outster suit against fellow commissioner Greg “Hootie” Smith when she filed suit against the commission in April of this year.

Chafins represented Robert Warren when Warren filed the suit against the County Commission. Warren alleged that, as a condition of his bond, he was forced to work on the Judge’s Work Program, and received injuries performing work on US 49. That suit was later dropped.

In the complaint, Baisden contended that, by representing Warren in that suit, she was filing suit against Baisden, as part of the commission. He said the representation was unethical because, since she had represented him on previous occasions, and was, by filing suit against the MCC, in fact, suing him. Basiden alleged it was a conflict.

In the letter clearing Chafin, the JIC stated that, in regard to the ouster suit against Smith, correct procedure was followed, as statute requires that the sheriff of the county as well as the county assessor file for the removal of a commissioner. Chafin said she represented Baisden as the assessor, which he was at the time, and not on a individual basis.

With regard to the suit by Warren against the MCC, the JIC said Chafin named the commission in the suit, but did not name any commissioner individually.

“You were not named individually in the suit, not did the complaint contain any allegations naming you individually or as a Commission,” the JIC stated in their decision.

The JIC stated their office considers the investigation finished.

“It is apparent . . . that the respondent [Chafin] has not engaged in any unethical conduct,” the letter from the JIC stated. “There is no violation of the rules on the part of the respondent and this matter should be closed.”