Kentucky Bar Ass'n v. Gray

318 S.W.3d 94 (Ky. 2010) · Supreme Court of Kentucky · August 26, 2010 · No. 2010-SC-000381-KB

Summary

The Supreme Court of Kentucky adopted the Kentucky Bar Association Board of Governors' recommendation to suspend James Basil Gray from practicing law for five years, with two years to serve and three years on probation. The suspension was based on criminal conduct, dishonesty, and failure to comply with monitoring requirements, and was conditioned on participation in a KYLAP monitoring program and payment of disciplinary costs.

Court
Supreme Court of Kentucky
Writing for the Court
John D. Minton, Jr., Chief Justice
Jurisdiction
Kentucky
Decision date
August 26, 2010
Docket number
2010-SC-000381-KB
Procedural posture
Attorney-discipline matter submitted to the Supreme Court of Kentucky after the KBA Board of Governors unanimously accepted stipulated violations and recommended a five-year suspension. Neither party sought review, and the Court declined to review the Board's decision independently.
Standard of review
The Court did not independently review the Board's decision; because neither party filed notice seeking review and the Court elected not to review the matter on its own motion, it adopted the Board's decision pursuant to SCR 3.370(10).
Precedential value
Published Kentucky Supreme Court attorney-discipline opinion
Parties
Kentucky Bar Association v. James B. Gray
Disposition
approved

Topics

appellate procedureadministrative lawstandard of review

Practice areas

legal ethicsattorney disciplineprofessional responsibility

Questions Presented

  1. Whether Gray violated SCR 3.130-8.4(b) by committing criminal acts that reflected adversely on his honesty, trustworthiness, or fitness as a lawyer.
  2. Whether Gray violated SCR 3.130-8.4(c) by stealing medication from his client and engaging in conduct involving dishonesty, fraud, deceit, or misrepresentation.
  3. Whether the KBA Board of Governors' recommended discipline should be adopted under SCR 3.370(10).

Holdings

  1. Gray was found guilty of violating SCR 3.130-8.4(b) by committing criminal acts reflecting adversely on his honesty, trustworthiness, or fitness as a lawyer, and SCR 3.130-8.4(c) by engaging in conduct involving dishonesty, fraud, deceit, or misrepresentation.
  2. The Court adopted the Board of Governors' recommendation and suspended Gray from practicing law in Kentucky for five years, with two years to serve followed by three years of probation conditioned on participation in the KYLAP program and a five-year monitoring agreement.

Key quotations

SCR 3.130-8.4(b) states that it is professional misconduct for a lawyer to "commit a criminal act that reflects adversely on the lawyer's honesty, trustworthiness or fitness as a lawyer in other respects." (95)
SCR 3.130-8.4(c) states that it is professional misconduct for a lawyer to "engage in conduct involving dishonesty, fraud, deceit or misrepresentation." (95)
Neither party has filed notice, pursuant to SCR 3.370(8), for this Court to review the Board's decision nor do we elect to review the decision of the Board pursuant to SCR 3.370(9). Therefore, we adopt the decision of the Board pursuant to SCR 3.370(10). (96)

Factual background

Gray agreed to represent Robert P. Butts in federal criminal proceedings for a $10,000 fee. While visiting Butts at home to collect payments and discuss the case, Gray was recorded stealing Butts's pain medication. Gray pleaded guilty to theft of a controlled substance and received pretrial diversion. He also failed to report a prior resisting-arrest conviction to the KBA and later failed multiple KYLAP drug and alcohol tests, including four positive alcohol tests.

Procedural history

The KBA Inquiry Commission charged Gray with violating SCR 3.130-8.4(b) and SCR 3.130-8.4(c). Gray stipulated to the violations. The KBA Board of Governors accepted the stipulations and unanimously recommended a five-year suspension, with two years to serve and three years on probation subject to KYLAP monitoring, plus costs. The Supreme Court adopted the Board's decision under SCR 3.370(10).

Court Document

Open PDF
Loading document…