In re Peloquin

Summary

The Kansas Supreme Court considered attorney-discipline charges against Michael Peloquin for lack of diligence, failure to safeguard client property, and inadequate supervision of a nonlawyer assistant. The court imposed a three-month suspension, subject to compliance with reinstatement requirements and payment of costs.

Holdings

1. Peloquin violated KRPC 1.3 because he failed to act with reasonable diligence and promptness in filing and prosecuting S.W.'s expungement petition.
2. Peloquin violated KRPC 1.15 and KRPC 5.3 by failing to properly safeguard client and third-party property and by failing to make reasonable efforts to ensure that his office manager's conduct was compatible with his professional obligations.
3. The record established by clear and convincing evidence that Peloquin violated KRPC 1.3, KRPC 1.15, and KRPC 5.3.
4. A three-month suspension was appropriate, and probation was not warranted.

Questions Presented

1. Whether clear and convincing evidence established that Peloquin violated KRPC 1.3 by failing to act with reasonable diligence and promptness in representing S.W.
2. Whether clear and convincing evidence established that Peloquin violated KRPC 1.15 and KRPC 5.3 by failing to safeguard client property and reasonably supervise his nonlawyer office manager.
3. What discipline was appropriate for the established violations, including whether probation or a three-month suspension should be imposed.

Disposition

other