Title: In Re Mountain
Citation: 239 Kan. 412, 721 P.2d 264
Docket Number: 58,537
State: Kansas
Issuer: Kansas Supreme Court
Date: June 13, 1986

239 Kan. 412 (1986)
721 P.2d 264
In the Matter of R. KEITH MOUNTAIN, Respondent.
No. 58,537

Supreme Court of Kansas.
Opinion filed June 13, 1986.
No appearance by respondent.
Roger N. Walter for disciplinary administrator.
A formal complaint was filed against R. Keith Mountain, attorney respondent, by Arno Windscheffel, disciplinary administrator, on January 10, 1985, alleging respondent violated the Lawyers Code of Professional Responsibility. Respondent answered denying he had violated his legal or ethical duty. A hearing before a disciplinary panel was held April 9 and May 3, 1985. Respondent appeared in person and by his attorney, Karl W. Friedel.
The panel made its final hearing report containing the following findings of fact and conclusions of law:
CONCLUSIONS OF LAW
Respondent took exceptions to the panel's final hearing report and took this appeal. Respondent neither filed a brief nor appeared for oral argument though properly notified.
We have examined the record and find substantial competent evidence to support the findings of fact of the hearing panel. The facts support the panel's conclusions of law that respondent violated the following sections of Supreme Court Rule 225, Code of Professional Responsibility (235 Kan. cxxxvii et seq.); DR 5-104(A); DR 7-101(A)(1), (2), and (3); DR 1-102(A)(4), (5), and (6); DR 2-106(A); DR 5-103(B); and DR 9-102(A) and (B)(3).
We conclude the panel's recommendation that respondent be disbarred is appropriate.
IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED that R. Keith Mountain be and he is hereby disbarred from the practice of law in the State of Kansas and the Clerk of the Appellate Courts is directed to strike his name from the rolls of attorneys authorized to practice law in the State of Kansas.
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that R. Keith Mountain shall forthwith comply with the provisions of Supreme Court Rule 218 (235 Kan. cxxxii).
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the costs of this action be assessed to respondent.