Complaint Review Committee recommends revocations, suspensions and fines for process servers

The Complaint Review Committee met virtually and on multiple cases recommended certification revocations, suspensions and administrative penalties for process servers accused of falsifying returns of service and failing to cooperate with investigations.

The committee voted to recommend the permanent revocation of Alexis Carbone’s process server certification and a $500 administrative penalty after staff presented a complaint alleging Carbone logged service entries that were carried out by another person. "We did find violations of this in this case," staff said, recommending revocation and the $500 fine. The committee moved, seconded and approved the recommendation to forward to the full commission.

In a separate matter, the committee accepted staff’s recommendation for a six-month suspension and a $600 administrative penalty for Michelle Banks, following allegations that included a false return of service, exaggerated authority and an improperly executed return. Staff told the committee that some allegations could not be fully adjudicated because parties did not cooperate with the investigator, and the panel tied several sanction elements to failures to cooperate.

On a complaint against Austin Hasso (also referenced in the record as Jasso), staff initially recommended permanent revocation and a $500 fine after a complainant alleged Hasso did not personally serve the named party. Hasso appeared by audio and said he may have mistaken seeing the complainant. Committee members reviewed video evidence that showed the respondent serving the complainant’s wife and discussed the seriousness of an inaccurate return. Rather than recommend revocation, the committee adopted a conditional outcome: a six-month suspension (probated), a $500 administrative penalty due within six months and a requirement that Hasso retake the initial orientation/certification course (committee language referenced a 7‑hour orientation course).

The committee also accepted staff recommendations in two matters involving failures to cooperate and procedural deficiencies. For Connor Henrich the committee accepted a staff recommendation of a reprimand for violation of the applicable code provision after staff reported insufficient evidence on the primary allegations but a failure to cooperate. For Ganayat Arowana, staff recommended permanent revocation and a $600 penalty based on video showing a male leaving documents on a porch and the respondent’s nonparticipation; the committee voted to adopt that recommendation. The panel also adopted a $100 penalty and reprimand for Ganiya Arowana in a related matter, noting the sanction would stack with the prior revocation in another file.

Procedural items concluded the meeting: the committee selected a member (Mister Quinn volunteered) to attend the JVCC commission meeting on August 7, 2026, and recorded that there were no public comments in the virtual waiting room. The committee adjourned after the votes.

Votes at a glance
• Case 3a (Alexis Carbone, cause no. 0818): staff recommended permanent revocation and $500 penalty; committee voted to accept and forward the recommendation to the full commission.
• Case 3b (Michelle Banks, cause no. 0878): staff recommended a six‑month suspension and $600 penalty; committee voted to accept.
• Case 3c (Austin Hasso, cause no. 0883): committee adopted a conditional six‑month suspension (probated), a $500 administrative penalty and required retaking the orientation course.
• Case 3d (Connor Henrich, cause no. 0913): committee accepted staff’s recommendation of a reprimand for failure to cooperate.
• Case 3f (Ganayat Arowana, cause no. 1007): committee voted to recommend permanent revocation and a $600 penalty.
• Case 3e (Ganiya Arowana, cause no. 0988): committee accepted a $100 penalty and reprimand; noted stacking with prior revocation.

The committee’s recommendations are advisory; final decisions will be made by the full commission at its next meeting in August. A notice of violation will be mailed to affected respondents and the full commission will consider the advisory board’s recommendations at its meeting scheduled for August.