Summary
The Kansas Supreme Court imposed a one-year suspension on attorney Rebecca Arlene Ware for failing to diligently represent Sprint in an employment discrimination matter, falsifying internal case-tracking records, providing false and misleading information during the disciplinary investigation, and failing to timely answer an amended complaint. The court adopted the violations found by the disciplinary panel and rejected Ware's challenge concerning proof of actual injury, concluding that actual or potential injury supported the discipline.
Topics
Practice areas
Questions Presented
- Whether the hearing panel properly considered ABA Standard 4.62 in recommending discipline.
- Whether the absence of proof of actual injury to Sprint precluded discipline based on knowing deception causing actual or potential injury.
- What discipline should be imposed for Ware's admitted violations of KRPC 1.3, KRPC 8.4(c), Supreme Court Rule 207(b), and Supreme Court Rule 211(b).
Holdings
- The hearing panel and the Supreme Court are not required to cite, discuss, or apply every potentially applicable ABA Standards provision; the Standards are advisory guidelines for selecting appropriate and uniform discipline.
- Proof of actual injury was not necessary to support the recommended discipline because Standard 4.62 encompasses potential injury, and the record supported both actual and potential injury to Sprint.
- A one-year suspension from the practice of law in Kansas was the appropriate discipline.
Key quotations
“In a disciplinary proceeding, this court considers the evidence, the findings of the disciplinary panel, and the arguments of the parties and determines whether violations of KRPC exist and, if they do, what discipline should be imposed.” (892)
“Actual injury or potential injury to the client was not necessary to the panel's recommended discipline although the facts herein support both.” (893)
“The majority of the court finds the appropriate discipline is a 1-year suspension effective on the filing of this opinion.” (894)
Factual background
Ware represented Sprint in an employment-discrimination matter before the Florida Commission on Human Relations but repeatedly failed to file a required position statement despite multiple notices and extensions. The agency consequently issued an adverse reasonable-cause determination against Sprint. Ware then falsified Sprint's internal case-tracking records to make it appear that the position statement and requested information had been provided, and the falsifications prevented Sprint from discovering her inaction before the adverse determination. During the disciplinary investigation, Ware initially blamed her secretary and denied receiving relevant notices, later changing her explanation.
Procedural history
The disciplinary administrator filed an amended formal complaint against Ware. A hearing panel found violations of KRPC 1.3, KRPC 8.4(c), Supreme Court Rule 207(b), and Supreme Court Rule 211(b), and recommended a one-year suspension with possible reinstatement proceedings. The Kansas Supreme Court independently reviewed the record and imposed a one-year suspension effective upon filing of the opinion.