In re Holyoak

304 Kan. 644 (2016) · Supreme Court of Kansas · June 10, 2016 · No. No. 114,836

Summary

The Kansas Supreme Court considered an original disciplinary proceeding against attorney Kerry Dale Holyoak arising from his negotiations with an oil company concerning mineral rights, property, and proposed agreements not to sue. The court found violations of Kansas professional-conduct rules concerning professional independence, communications about legal services, misrepresentation, and conduct adversely reflecting on fitness to practice law, and imposed an indefinite suspension.

Court
Supreme Court of Kansas
Writing for the Court
Per Curiam
Jurisdiction
Kansas
Decision date
June 10, 2016
Docket number
No. 114,836
Procedural posture
Original proceeding in attorney discipline brought by the Office of the Disciplinary Administrator against Kansas attorney Kerry Dale Holyoak.
Standard of review
The Kansas Supreme Court independently considers the evidence, the disciplinary panel's findings, and the parties' arguments; attorney misconduct must be established by clear and convincing evidence. Uncontested hearing-panel findings are deemed admitted under Supreme Court Rule 212(c) and (d).
Precedential value
Published Kansas Supreme Court opinion; precedential
Parties
Office of the Disciplinary Administrator v. Kerry Dale Holyoak
Disposition
other

Topics

mineralsmineral rightsreal estatecontractsadministrative law

Practice areas

legal ethicsattorney disciplineprofessional responsibilitymineral rightsreal estate

Questions Presented

  1. Whether clear and convincing evidence established that Holyoak violated KRPC 5.4(d), 7.1(a), 8.4(c), and 8.4(g).
  2. Whether the disciplinary proceeding could properly consider KRPC 8.4(g) despite the rule not being specifically identified in the formal complaint.
  3. What discipline was appropriate for Holyoak's multiple professional-conduct violations.

Holdings

  1. The evidence established by clear and convincing evidence that Holyoak violated KRPC 5.4(d), 7.1(a), 8.4(c), and 8.4(g).
  2. The hearing panel properly considered KRPC 8.4(g) because the formal complaint alleged sufficient facts to place Holyoak on notice of that potential violation.
  3. An indefinite suspension from the practice of law was warranted.

Key quotations

We find his conduct, which ultimately evolved into a scheme of bribery and extortion, to be of such a serious magnitude and unconscionable nature that an indefinite period of suspension is warranted. (at 29-30)
If not fully accepting and appreciating that falsely claiming to the representation of over 50 litigants and offering to destroy all evidence that could be used on their and others' behalf in exchange for wiring $1.9 million to an offshore account is wrongful, nothing short of the action we are taking today will adequately protect the public. (at 30)

Factual background

Holyoak, a Kansas attorney, negotiated with Wilson County Holdings, LLC, concerning the sale or lease of mineral rights and related real property in Fredonia, Kansas. In connection with those negotiations, he claimed to represent approximately 50 landowners when he did not, proposed a covenant not to sue that required destruction of documents and potential evidence, and sought a $1.9 million payment by offshore wire transfer. Separately, his law practice was organized as a limited liability company listing his nonlawyer wife as an owner, and his law-firm website referred to his wife's mediation services without sufficient clarification.

Procedural history

The Disciplinary Administrator filed a formal complaint alleging violations of the Kansas Rules of Professional Conduct. After a hearing, a panel of the Kansas Board for Discipline of Attorneys found violations of KRPC 5.4(d), 7.1(a), 8.4(c), and 8.4(g), and recommended a six-month suspension. Holyoak did not file exceptions, so the panel's factual findings were deemed admitted. The Kansas Supreme Court adopted the panel's conclusions of law but imposed an indefinite suspension instead of the recommended six-month suspension.

Court Document

Open PDF
Loading document…