In re the Disbarment of Cooksey

Supreme Court of Kansas

In re the Disbarment of Cooksey

97 P. 1134, 78 Kan. 685, 1908 Kan. LEXIS 132

CourtSupreme Court of Kansas

DecidedOctober 10, 1908

DocketNo. 16,166

StatusPublished

This text of 97 P. 1134 (In re the Disbarment of Cooksey) 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 Disbarment of Cooksey, 97 P. 1134, 78 Kan. 685, 1908 Kan. LEXIS 132 (kan 1908).

Pincite

Opinion

Per Curiam:

C. W. Trickett brings to the attention •of the court an accusation containing charges which he makes affecting the professional conduct of C. R. Cooksey, an attorney of this court, and asks that such charges be investigated and such action be taken as the result of the investigation may indicate. On the face of the accusation it appears that shortly before it was filed Mr. Cooksey instituted disbarment proceedings against Mr. Trickett in another forum, and that the charges of the accusation relate to subjects of investigation involved in, and connected with, that proceeding. Without passing upon the merits of the accusation or its sufficiency as a basis for an investigation ■of the conduct of the party charged, the court is of the opinion that it should not take cognizance of it pending "the disbarment proceeding against the court’s informant. Therefore, the prayer of the accusation is denied.

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

Per Curiam:

C. W. Trickett brings to the attention •of the court an accusation containing charges which he makes affecting the professional conduct of C. R. Cooksey, an attorney of this court, and asks that such charges be investigated and such action be taken as the result of the investigation may indicate. On the face of the accusation it appears that shortly before it was filed Mr. Cooksey instituted disbarment proceedings against Mr. Trickett in another forum, and that the charges of the accusation relate to subjects of investigation involved in, and connected with, that proceeding. Without passing upon the merits of the accusation or its sufficiency as a basis for an investigation ■of the conduct of the party charged, the court is of the opinion that it should not take cognizance of it pending "the disbarment proceeding against the court’s informant. Therefore, the prayer of the accusation is denied.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

97 P. 1134, 78 Kan. 685, 1908 Kan. LEXIS 132, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/in-re-the-disbarment-of-cooksey-kan-1908.