In Re: Richard Davis Null

Opinion

TO BE PUBLISHED

Supreme Court of Kentucky 2026-SC-0192-KB

IN RE: RICHARD DAVIS NULL

IN SUPREME COURT

OPINION AND ORDER

Richard Davis Null was admitted to the practice of law with the Kentucky Bar Association (KBA) on April 24, 1998. His KBA number is 87271, and his bar roster address is 535 Broadway St., Paducah, Kentucky 42001.

The KBA Board of Governors recommended that Null be found guilty of three counts of violating the Supreme Court Rules; that he remain indefinitely suspended from the practice of law; that he make restitution of $1,250 to a former client; that he return any documents to that client; and that he pay costs of $272.69 associated with this action. For the reasons below, we adopt the Board’s recommendation that Null remain indefinitely suspended but reject the Board’s recommendation to impose conditions.

BACKGROUND

On June 18, 2024, Danyel Loar, a former client, filed a bar complaint against Null. In November 2018, Loar retained Null to represent him in a contract case and paid a $1,250 retainer. Null was suspended from the practice of law on December 15, 2022, and did not inform Loar of the

2

suspension until March 2023. Loar then made several attempts to contact Null to request the return of documents Loar had provided for his case. Null did not respond. He failed to return the client’s documents or refund the unearned portion of the retainer. Loar sent his bar complaint via certified mail to Null’s bar roster address, but it was returned on July 8, 2024. The McCracken County Sheriff’s Office attempted to serve Null, but the attempt failed. The Executive Director later served him on August 19, 2024.

The Inquiry Commission filed a three-count charge against Null, asserting violations of the following Rules of Professional Conduct. First, the Inquiry Commission alleged that Null violated SCR 3.130(1.4)(a)(3) and (4), which require a lawyer to “keep the client reasonably informed about the status of the matter” and “properly comply with reasonable requests for information.” Second, the Inquiry Commission alleged that Null violated SCR 3.130(1.16)(d), which requires a lawyer, upon termination of representation, to “to the extent reasonably practicable to protect a client's interests, such as giving reasonable notice 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.” Third, the Inquiry Commission alleged that Null violated SCR 3.130(3.4)(c), which provides that a “lawyer shall not: knowingly disobey an obligation under the rules of a tribunal except for an open refusal based on an assertion that no valid obligation exists.”

3

The Commission’s attempts to serve Null by certified mail and the McCracken County Sheriff’s Office were unsuccessful. Null was ultimately served via the KBA Executive Director under SCR 3.035(2). Null failed to file an answer to the charge, so it was submitted to the Board of Governors (Board) as a default case under SCR 3.210(1).

On May 5, 2026, the Board filed findings of fact, conclusions of law, and a recommendation for indefinite suspension. The Board unanimously recommended that Null be found guilty of the violations. The Board further recommended that Null remain indefinitely suspended; make restitution of $1,250 to Loar; return Loar’s documents; and pay costs of $272.69 associated with this action.

On May 7, 2026, this Court entered an order for Null to show cause why he should not be indefinitely suspended for failure to file an answer to the Board’s findings of fact, conclusions of law, and recommendation. Null did not respond.

Prior Discipline

Null has an extensive disciplinary history. In 2008, this Court privately reprimanded Null. In 2013, this Court suspended Null from the practice of law for 61 days and probated him for two years for failing to refund the unearned portion of his fee and to provide the former client with his file. Null v. Ky. Bar Ass’n, 408 S.W.3d 76, 78 (Ky. 2013). The Inquiry Commission privately admonished Null four times between July 8, 2019, and March 9, 2022. Two of the admonitions ordered Null to refund unearned fees to former clients.

4

On December 15, 2022, this Court resolved eight separate disciplinary actions against Null and imposed a one-year suspension from the practice of law, with 185 days to be served and 185 days to be probated for two years, subject to conditions. Null v. Ky. Bar Ass’n, 714 S.W.3d 354 (Ky. 2022), modified March 23, 2023. Null was found guilty of violating seven counts of SCR 3.130(1.3) for failing to “act with reasonable diligence and promptness in representing a client”; two counts of SCR 3.130(1.4)(a)(3) for failing to “keep the client reasonably informed about the status of the matter”; four counts of SCR 3.130(1.4)(a)(4) for failing to “promptly comply with reasonable requests for information”; one count of SCR 3.130(1.6)(a) for disclosing information relating to representation of a client without informed consent; two counts of SCR 3.130 (1.15)(a) for failing to have a trust account to safeguard client funds; seven counts of SCR 3.130(1.16)(d) for failing to refund the unearned portion of his fee to six clients, two counts of SCR 3.130(8.1)(a) for knowingly making a false statement of material fact that he refunded his fee to a client; one count of SCR 3.130(8.1)(b) for failing to correct the misapprehension and knowingly failing to provide deposit information requested by Bar Counsel; and four counts of SCR 3.130(8.4)(c) for “engaging conduct involving dishonesty, fraud, deceit misrepresentation.”

On April 26, 2023, the KBA moved this Court to enter a show cause order against Null for violating the conditions of his probation. On May 19, 2023, this Court entered an order directing Null to show cause why the 185- day probated portion of his one-year suspension should not be imposed for

5

violating the conditions of his probation. Null failed to respond to this Court’s show cause order. On August 22, 2023, this Court entered an order imposing the full one-year suspension with conditions that Null inform clients of his inability to represent them within ten days, not to accept new clients or collect unearned fees, and immediately cancel and cease any advertising activities. Null v. Ky. Bar Ass’n, 677 S.W.3d 344 (Ky. 2023).

One year later, on August 22, 2024, this Court entered an order indefinitely suspending Null from the practice of law. In re Null, 701 S.W.3d 224, 225 (Ky. 2024). In that case, two former clients filed complaints against Null raising substantially similar allegations to those resulting in his 2022 temporary suspension. The Board of Governors unanimously recommended a two-year suspension to run consecutively to his previously ordered suspension. Id. at 224-25. This Court noted that Null’s location was unknown, and it appeared “that Null decided to effectively, and permanently, cease observing the Rules of Professional Conduct and cease complying with the direct orders of this Court once his initial term of temporary suspension became effective on December 15, 2022.” Id. at 226–27.

This Court declined to follow the recommendation and instead indefinitely suspended Null from the practice of law under SCR 3.167(1) based on his “prior disciplinary actions, his current suspension, the abandonment of his former clients, and his complete disregard for the orders of this Court and the rules of practice in this Commonwealth.” Id. at 227. This Court further explained that Null’s suspension would remain in effect pending further review

6

by this Court, upon Null's filing a motion for an accounting of his failure to respond and requesting a final determination, upon the KBA's motion for a final disposition, or upon the Court’s own motion. Id.

ANALYSIS

In the instant action, the Board recommended that Null be indefinitely suspended from the practice of law, pay restitution to the client, return the client’s documents, and pay costs. Null is currently indefinitely suspended from the practice of law, as ordered on August 22, 2024, for his failure to participate in a prior disciplinary action. This Court remains unaware of Null’s current location, and he has remained unresponsive since his temporary suspension on December 15, 2022. Because he did not dispute the Board’s findings of fact, we adopt the Board’s finding that Null is guilty of the following violations: one count of SCR 3.130(1.4)(a)(3) and (4); SCR 3.130(1.16)(d); and SCR 3.130(3.4)(c).

The Board recommended that we order Null to pay restitution in the amount of $1,250 and to return any documents to Loar. Though not specifically addressed in prior disciplinary cases, our rules do not permit this Court to impose conditions when it indefinitely suspends an attorney from the practice of law. SCR 3.380 sets forth the degrees of discipline available for violations of our rules: discipline may be administered by way of public reprimand, suspension from practice for a definite time, or permanent disbarment, all of which may be with or without such conditions as the Court may impose. This Court has held that the “plain language of the rule indicates

7

that” because “permanent disbarment stands alone separated from the language allowing us to impose conditions by the word ‘or,’” this Court cannot impose conditions on an attorney. Ky. Bar Ass'n v. Chesley, 393 S.W.3d 584, 602 (Ky. 2013).

Indefinite suspension is not included as an available sanction under SCR 3.380. Instead, SCR 3.167(1) allows this Court to “suspend the Respondent from the practice of law for an indefinite period of time in cases in which the Respondent has failed to file an answer to a Charge pursuant to SCR 3.164, or having answered, has thereafter failed to participate in the disciplinary process.” SCR 3.167 does not include language allowing this Court to impose conditions in conjunction with indefinite suspension. Indefinite suspension is even further removed from the language in SCR 3.380 allowing us to impose conditions, as it is part of a separate rule. Thus, our rules do not allow us to impose conditions in an order indefinitely suspending an attorney from the practice of law.

Though this order indefinitely suspends Null from the practice of law, our August 22, 2024, order of indefinite suspension remains in effect. Under SCR 3.167(5), “[i]f a Respondent fails to seek reinstatement within five (5) years after entry of an Order of Indefinite Suspension, the Office of Bar Counsel shall move the Court for permanent disbarment.” (emphasis added). If Null fails to seek reinstatement within five years of August 22, 2024, the Office of Bar Counsel must move for permanent disbarment after five years of the entry of the August 22, 2024, order.

8

We reiterate the conclusion in our August 22, 2024, opinion and order:

We do not regard this as a final adjudication of the matter. Null’s indefinite suspension shall remain in effect pending further review by this Court upon his motion for a final determination in this case which includes an accounting for both his failure to respond in this current matter and his failures to abide by the prior orders of this court, upon a motion of the Kentucky Bar Association for a final disposition, upon the presentation of additional charges against Null, or upon the Court’s own initiative.

In re Null, 701 S.W.3d at 227. Accordingly, this Court ORDERS that: 1. Richard Davis Null is found guilty of the above-described violations of the Rules of Professional Conduct. 2. Null remains indefinitely suspended from the practice of law. 3. All prior orders of this Court, including but not limited to those concerning the refunding of money by Null to each of his former clients, remain in full force and effect. 4. If he has not already done so, Null must, within 10 days after issuance of this order, notify, by letter duly placed with the United States Postal Service, all courts or other tribunals in which he has matters pending, and all clients of his inability to represent them and of the necessity and urgency to promptly obtain new counsel as required by SCR 3.390. Null shall simultaneously provide a copy of all such letters of notification to the Office of Bar Counsel.

9

5. If he has not already done so, Null shall immediately cancel any pending advertisements, to the extent possible, and shall terminate any advertising activity for the duration of the term of suspension. 6. If he has not already done so, Null is instructed to promptly take all reasonable steps to protect the interests of his clients. He shall not, during the term of suspension, accept new clients or collect unearned fees, and he shall comply with the provisions of SCR 3.130(7.50); and 7. In accordance with SCR 3.450, Null is directed to pay all costs associated with these disciplinary proceedings in the amount of $272.69, for which execution may issue from this Court upon finality of this Opinion and Order.

Lambert, C.J.; Bisig, Conley, Goodwine, Keller, and Thompson, JJ., sitting. All concur. Nickell, J., not sitting. ENTERED: August 20, 2026.

______________________________________

CHIEF JUSTICE