In re The Complaints made against Johnson

592 P.2d 102, 225 Kan. 466, 1979 Kan. LEXIS 231
CourtSupreme Court of Kansas
DecidedMarch 8, 1979
DocketNo. 50,708; Bar Docket No. 5860
StatusPublished
Cited by3 cases

This text of 592 P.2d 102 (In re The Complaints made against Johnson) 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 Complaints made against Johnson, 592 P.2d 102, 225 Kan. 466, 1979 Kan. LEXIS 231 (kan 1979).

Opinion

WHEREAS, In a proceeding conducted by the State Board of Law Examiners (under our rules as they existed prior to January 8, 1979) to inquire into complaints of alleged professional misconduct of LEO N. JOHNSON, and

WHEREAS, Following a full hearing of such complaints, the State Board of Law Examiners found that Leo N. Johnson, Council Grove, Kansas, neglected several legal matters entrusted to him including (1) failing to take any action on behalf of his client in an action involving an automobile accident from the fall of 1972 until his employment was terminated in 1977, and (2) failing to prosecute a claim of his client for unpaid child support from the time he was retained in December, 1976, until December, 1978, in violation of DR 6-101(A)(3) of the Code of Professional Responsibility (223 Kan. cxv), and

WHEREAS, The State Board of Law Examiners has made a written recommendation to this Court that Leo N. Johnson be indefinitely suspended from the practice of law, and

WHEREAS, In accordance with the Rules of this Court a copy of the report, findings and recommendations of the Board was mailed to respondent on December 29,1978, along with a citation directing the respondent to file with the Court either a statement that he did not wish to file exceptions, or his exceptions to the report, and

WHEREAS, The respondent has failed to respond to such citation, and

WHEREAS, On the 23rd day of February, 1979, after notice to respondent, a hearing was held before the Court for the purpose of considering the report of the Board of Law Examiners, and

WHEREAS, The State of Kansas appeared by Philip A. Harley, disciplinary counsel, and respondent appeared neither in person nor by counsel, and

WHEREAS, Upon consideration of the record and being fully advised in the premises, the Court accepts the report, findings and recommendations of the State Board of Law Examiners.

[467]*467It is, therefore, by the Court, Considered, Ordered and Adjudged that the said LEO N. JOHNSON be and he is hereby disciplined by suspension from the practice of law as of this 8th day of March, 1979, and that he pay the costs of the proceedings.

It is further ordered that this ORDER OF SUSPENSION be published in the official Kansas Reports.

By Order of the Court,

dated this 8th day of March, 1979.

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

Related

In re Johnson
770 P.2d 842 (Supreme Court of Kansas, 1989)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
592 P.2d 102, 225 Kan. 466, 1979 Kan. LEXIS 231, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/in-re-the-complaints-made-against-johnson-kan-1979.