Chelsea Kay Merta was licensed in 2014. Merta worked for Stange Law Firm from June 2016 to February 2018 before resigning to open her own solo practice. Before resigning, Merta deleted work product from her law firm laptop and client-related text messages and e-mails from her law firm cellular telephone. Merta also took client files and downloaded client information from the law firm onto a flash drive. Stange sued Merta, alleging she violated the Missouri computer tampering act and breached her contract, her duty of loyalty and her fiduciary duties. The circuit court issued a temporary restraining order requiring Merta to return to Stange all firm-related files, documents and information in her possession or control by February 20, 2018. The order also required Merta to preserve all records with current or former Stange clients. Originally, Merta provided only files for four clients. After the deadline passed, she also provided hundreds of pages of law firm-related documents as well as the flash drive. Stange moved for civil contempt, and the circuit court issued a show cause order. In January 2019, the circuit court entered a judgment of contempt against Merta, finding she willfully failed to comply with the temporary restraining order. The circuit court ordered her to turn over all her computer devices, cellular phones, and USB drives and to provide her credentials for her e-mail and cloud accounts by January 11, 2019. Stange found law firm documents on Merta’s computer as well as two accounts for which Stange was not given credentials. Stange moved for contempt again. The litigation was stayed after Merta filed for bankruptcy. While the bankruptcy proceedings were pending, and at Stange’s request, the circuit court conducted a hearing on its second contempt motion. Upon advice of counsel, Merta did not appear at the hearing. The circuit court again found her in contempt of the temporary restraining order and ordered her imprisoned in the St. Louis County jail for 48 hours. After the bankruptcy proceedings concluded, Merta served her jail time and admitted to the allegations in the lawsuit. Stange and Merta later entered into a confidential settlement agreement. In 2022, the chief disciplinary counsel filed an information against Merta, alleging her misappropriation of client and law firm data and contempt of court orders violated the professional rules of conduct. The matter was heard by a disciplinary hearing panel. The chief disciplinary counsel and Merta stipulated as to the facts, rule violations and recommended discipline. In accordance with the stipulation, the panel recommended Merta be suspended indefinitely with no leave to apply for reinstatement for 18 months, the suspension be stayed, and Merta be placed on probation. Merta and the chief disciplinary counsel accepted the panel’s recommended discipline. This Court rejected it and ordered briefing. 

This case presents two questions for this Court – whether Merta violated rules of professional conduct and, if so, what discipline, if any, is appropriate.