bt, 

,i5uprptriP Gurf of 3,firnfurkii 

2014-SC-000218-KB 

KENTUCKY BAR ASSOCIATION MOVANT 

V. IN SUPREME COURT 

DANIEL EDWARD PRIDEMORE RESPONDENT 

OPINION AND ORDER 

The Board of Governors of the Kentucky Bar Association (KBA) has 

recommended that Daniel Edward Pridemore be found guilty of six counts of 

misconduct and be suspended from the practice of law for 30 days. 

Pridemore was admitted to the practice of law in the Commonwealth of 

Kentucky on April 30, 2010; his KBA member number is 93508; his bar roster 

address is 3565 Lone Oak Road, Suite 3A, Paducah, Kentucky 42003. 

Pridemore was hired by Terrell Stacy Harper to represent him in a 

divorce and child-custody matter in McCracken Family Court. The eventual 

divorce decree included a domestic violence order against Harper. He paid 

Pridemore $7,000 to pursue an appeal. Pridemore filed the notice of appeal on 

October 11, 2012. The Court of Appeals ordered that the case be expedited. 

Soon thereafter, Harper's ex-wife moved to have the appeal dismissed for 

procedural noncompliance. No timely response was filed, and the Court of 

Appeals dismissed the appeal on December 20, 2012. 
In January 2013, Harper learned that his appeal had been dismissed. He 

contacted Pridemore, who assured him that the dismissal was a technical or 

clerical error and that he would take steps to have the appeal reinstated. Over 

the next several months, Harper and Pridemore exchanged several emails 

about the status of the appeal. In April 2013, Pridemore advised Harper that 

the appeal could not be reinstated. 

Pridemore offered to have the domestic violence order modified for no 

additional fee. In May 2013, Pridemore drafted an agreed order to modify the 

domestic violence order, and Harper's wife signed the agreed order. 

After that, Pridemore did not respond to several communications from 

Harper and took no further steps to represent Harper. On July 5, 2013, 

Harper filed a bar complaint against Pridemore. 

In October 2013, the Inquiry Commission issued a six-count charge of 

professional misconduct against Pridemore. The charge alleged that Pridemore 

violated (1) SCR 3.130-1.3 1by failing to act with reasonable diligence and 

promptness in pursuing the appeal; (2) SCR 3.130-1.4(a)(3) 2by failing to keep 

Harper informed about his case; (3) SCR 3.130-1.4(a)(4) 3by failing to promptly 

comply with Harper's requests for information; (4) SCR 3.130-1.16(d) 4by not 

1"A lawyer shall act with reasonable diligence and promptness in representing 

a client." SCR 3.130-1.3. 

2"A lawyer shall ... keep the client reasonably informed about the status of the 

matter ...." SCR 3.130-1.4(a)(3). 

3"A lawyer shall ... promptly comply with reasonable requests for information 

...." SCR 3.130-1.4(a)(4). 

4"Upon termination of representation, a lawyer shall take steps to the extent 

reasonably practicable to protect a client's interests, such as giving reasonable notice 

2 
refunding the unearned portions of the fee paid by Harper; (5) SCR 3.130-

8.1(b) 5by failing to respond to the bar complaint; and (6) SCR 3.130-8.4(c) 6by 

telling Harper that his appeal had been dismissed for a technical or clerical 

error rather than Pridemore's failure to take action. 

At some point, Pridemore communicated with the Office of Bar Counsel, 

claiming that he had been receiving mentorship from a representative of the 

Kentucky Lawyers Assistance Program. But he never submitted any additional 

information in this regard. Moreover, he never responded to the bar complaint 

or the charge.? As a result, this matter was submitted to the Board of 

Governors as a default case. 

The Board voted unanimously, 18-0, to find Pridemore guilty of all six 

counts. After this vote, the Board considered Pridemore's history of discipline, 

which included a recommendation of 30-day suspension that, at that time, had 

not been acted upon by this Court but has since been imposed, see Kentucky 

to the client, allowing time for employment of other counsel, surrendering papers and 

property to which the client is entitled and refunding any advance payment of fee or 

expense that has not been earned or incurred. The lawyer may retain papers relating 

to the client to the extent permitted by other law." SCR 3.130-1.16(d). 

5"[A] lawyer ... in connection with a disciplinary matter, shall not ... fail to 

disclose a fact necessary to correct a misapprehension known by the person to have 

arisen in the matter, or knowingly fail to respond to a lawful demand for information 

from an admissions or disciplinary authority, except that this Rule does not require 

disclosure of information otherwise protected by Rule 1.6." SCR 3.130-8.1(b). 

6"It is professional misconduct for a lawyer to ... engage in conduct involving 

dishonesty, fraud, deceit or misrepresentation ...." SCR 3.130-8.4(c). 

7In fact, the charge itself was originally returned by the postal service as 

unclaimed, and service by sheriff was unsuccessful. Ultimately, the service of the 

charge was completed by sending a copy to the Executive Director of the KBA, who 

under SCR 3.175(2) is designated as the agent for service of process for attorneys who 

cannot be reached by other means. 

3 
Bar Ass'n v. Pridemore, S.W.3d , 2014 WL 1512234 (Ky. 2014), and a 

still ongoing suspension for non-payment of bar dues and failure to meet 

continuing legal education requirements. In light of this history and 

Pridemore's conduct, the Board voted unanimously to recommend a 30-day 

suspension to be served consecutively to any other current or pending 

discipline, with reinstatement contingent on his compliance with three 

recommendations: (1) that he submit to evaluation by the Kentucky Lawyers 

Assistance Program; (2) that he attend the Office of Bar Counsel's Ethics and 

Professionalism Enhancement Program; 8and (3) that he pay the costs of this 

proceeding. 9 

At this point neither the KBA's Office of Bar Counsel nor Pridemore has 

sought review by the Court under SCR 3.370(7). Furthermore, this Court 

declines to undertake review pursuant to SCR 3.370(8), meaning that the 

Board's recommendation is adopted pursuant to SCR 3.370(9). 

Order 

ACCORDINGLY, IT IS ORDERED THAT: 

1. Daniel Edward Pridemore is found guilty of the above-described and 

admitted violations of the Rules of Professional Conduct. 

8Pridemore has already been ordered to attend this program. See Kentucky Bar 

Ass'n v. Pridemore, S.W.3d , 2014 WL 1512234 (Ky. 2014). 

9The Board did not address whether Pridemore should be required to pay back 

the $7,000 he took as payment to prosecute the appeal for Harper. Because the Court 

has inadequate information as to whether that money is still owed, and the Board has 

not made a recommendation regarding it, this Opinion and Order does not address 

whether restitution is owed. 

4 
2. Pridemore is suspended from the practice of law for 30 days, with that 

time to run consecutively to any other current or pending sanction. 

3. Pridemore's reinstatement is contingent on the following conditions: 

a. that he submit to evaluation by the Kentucky Lawyers 

Assistance Program if he has not done so already; 

b. that he attend and successfully complete the Office of Bar 

Counsel's Ethics and Professionalism Enhancement Program; 

and 

c. that he pay the costs of this proceeding. 

4. In accordance with SCR 3.450, Pridemore is directed to pay all costs 

associated with these disciplinary proceedings against him, said sum 

being $609.41, for which execution may issue from this Court upon 

finality of this Opinion and Order. 

All sitting. All concur. 

ENTERED: August 21, 2014. 

C JUSTICE 

5