In re the Accusation for Disbarment of Fipps

Supreme Court of Kansas

In re the Accusation for Disbarment of Fipps

413 P.2d 985, 196 Kan. 744

CourtSupreme Court of Kansas

DecidedMay 7, 1966

DocketNo. 44,579

StatusPublished

This text of 413 P.2d 985 (In re the Accusation for Disbarment of Fipps) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Supreme Court of Kansas primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

In re the Accusation for Disbarment of Fipps, 413 P.2d 985, 196 Kan. 744 (kan 1966).

Pincite

Opinion

Per Curiam:

In his written answer to the State Board of Law Examiners’ amended accusation in disbarment, the accused, Alonzo J. Fipps, admitted the allegations set forth therein and “throws himself on the mercy of the court.” His prayer was that the remedy for disbarment requested be reduced to suspension for a period of six months and he consented in writing to the entry of such an order.

Upon consideration of the amended accusation and the answer, the court finds that Alonzo J. Fipps has violated the can on of legal ethics and the standards of conduct required of him as an attorney at law, but also finds that the penalty of disbarment, in view of the nature of the acts alleged, is too severe.

It is therefore ordered that the certificate and rights of Alonzo J. Fipps as attorney at law be and the same are hereby suspended for a period of six months from and after the 7th day of May, 1966.

Fromme, J., not participating.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Per Curiam:

In his written answer to the State Board of Law Examiners’ amended accusation in disbarment, the accused, Alonzo J. Fipps, admitted the allegations set forth therein and “throws himself on the mercy of the court.” His prayer was that the remedy for disbarment requested be reduced to suspension for a period of six months and he consented in writing to the entry of such an order.

Upon consideration of the amended accusation and the answer, the court finds that Alonzo J. Fipps has violated the can on of legal ethics and the standards of conduct required of him as an attorney at law, but also finds that the penalty of disbarment, in view of the nature of the acts alleged, is too severe.

It is therefore ordered that the certificate and rights of Alonzo J. Fipps as attorney at law be and the same are hereby suspended for a period of six months from and after the 7th day of May, 1966.

Fromme, J., not participating.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

413 P.2d 985, 196 Kan. 744, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/in-re-the-accusation-for-disbarment-of-fipps-kan-1966.