Court Opinion

ID: 9786132
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-30 23:48:13.170876+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T07:36:41.928435
License: Public Domain

Six, J.,
dissenting and concurring: I would adopt the panel report and impose the panel’s recommended sanctions. As the majority observed at the time of the panel hearing, respondent was suspended from the practice of law for failure to pay his registration fee and failure to comply with the Continuing Legal Education rules. The majority has ordered reimbursement of travel expenses for Jenette Gleason. I agree with the panel that before respondent’s license is reinstated he also must “(2) . . . pay all registration fees and penalties due and owing; and (3) ... comply with the *124requirements of the Rules Relating to Continuing Legal Education of the State of Kansas.”
While it is true that Peggy Deghand was at the trial and knew the outcome of her case, KRPC 1.5(d) does not qualify the duty of an attorney. KRPC 1.5(d) says: “[T]he lawyer shall provide the client with a written statement stating the outcome of the matter . . . .” The language is mandatory, not discretionary. Respondent admits failing to follow the rule. Respondent made false promises to pay a witness’ expenses if the witness agreed to testify at trial.
The majority agrees with the respondent’s argument that he was not required to provide a final accounting to Deghand unless there was a recovery. Deghand had given respondent a retainer of $200 and then an additional $500; the latter, she testified, was earmarked for Gleason’s travel expenses. Had respondent given Deghand an accounting of where her two payments were used and the total amount of the expenses incurred, respondent likely would have avoided Deghand’s complaints. Instead, he refused to return telephone calls to Gleason, refused to pick up the registered mail containing her receipts, and refused to assist Gleason in her attempt to recoup travel expenses.