Summary
The Supreme Court of Kansas considered an uncontested attorney discipline proceeding against Russell W. Davisson. The court found violations involving diligence, client communication, conduct prejudicial to the administration of justice, cooperation with disciplinary investigations, and failure to timely answer the formal complaint, and imposed disbarment.
Topics
Practice areas
Questions Presented
- Whether the evidence established by clear and convincing evidence that Davisson violated KRPC 1.3, KRPC 1.4(a), KRPC 8.4(d), Kansas Supreme Court Rule 207(b), and Kansas Supreme Court Rule 211(b).
- What discipline should be imposed for the established violations.
Holdings
- The court held that the evidence established by clear and convincing evidence that Davisson violated KRPC 1.3, KRPC 1.4(a), KRPC 8.4(d), Kansas Supreme Court Rule 207(b), and Kansas Supreme Court Rule 211(b).
- The court held that Davisson should be disbarred.
Key quotations
“The evidence before the hearing panel establishes by clear and convincing evidence the charged misconduct violated KRPC 1.3 (diligence); KRPC 1.4(a) (client communication); KRPC 8.4(d) (conduct prejudicial to administration of justice); Kansas Supreme Court Rule 207(b) (cooperation with disciplinary investigation); and Kansas Supreme Court Rule 211(b) (timely answer formal disciplinary complaint).” (at 20)
“After careful consideration, the court holds the respondent should be disbarred.” (at 20)
“IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED that Russell W. Davisson be and he is hereby disbarred from the practice of law in the state of Kansas, effective on the filing of this opinion” (at 21)
Factual background
Davisson represented clients in two Chapter 13 bankruptcy matters and a probate matter. He failed to complete required bankruptcy filings, failed to take timely action to preserve one client's bankruptcy case, filed an estate inventory late, failed to timely complete the probate proceeding, and repeatedly failed to communicate with his clients. He also failed to cooperate with disciplinary investigations, failed to timely answer the formal complaint, and failed to appear at the disciplinary hearing.
Procedural history
The Disciplinary Administrator filed a formal complaint on September 15, 2017. A hearing panel of the Kansas Board for Discipline of Attorneys held a hearing on November 16, 2017, found violations of KRPC 1.3, KRPC 1.4(a), KRPC 8.4(d), Supreme Court Rule 207(b), and Supreme Court Rule 211(b), and unanimously recommended disbarment. The respondent did not object to the panel report or appear before the Supreme Court, which adopted the panel's findings and conclusions and imposed disbarment.