KENTUCKY BAR ASS'N v. Ellis

365 S.W.3d 548, 2012 WL 1890383, 2012 Ky. LEXIS 65
CourtKentucky Supreme Court
DecidedMay 24, 2012
Docket2012-SC-000053-KB
StatusPublished
Cited by1 cases

This text of 365 S.W.3d 548 (KENTUCKY BAR ASS'N v. Ellis) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Kentucky Supreme Court primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
KENTUCKY BAR ASS'N v. Ellis, 365 S.W.3d 548, 2012 WL 1890383, 2012 Ky. LEXIS 65 (Ky. 2012).

Opinion

*549 OPINION AND ORDER

The trial commissioner recommends the Court suspend Darren Burton Ellis for thirty-seven months for his misconduct addressed in six disciplinary files and that the Court run the suspension concurrently with a ninety-day suspension Ellis previously received in 2010. Ellis, whose Kentucky Bar Association (KBA) Member Number is 86419 and whose last known Bar address is 9909 East Avenue, Louisville, Ky. 40272, was admitted to the practice of law in this Commonwealth on October 18,1996.

Neither party having filed a notice of appeal, this case comes to the Court pursuant to Supreme Court Rule (SCR) SBeOM). 1 Finding the trial commissioner’s report and recommendation to be supported by the record and the law, this Court declines to review the decision 2 and adopts the trial commissioner’s recommendation. 3

KBA File 16013

In June 2007, Ellis accepted a $300.00 retainer from Sherry Stankowski to investigate a potential property claim but he never pursued the investigation and failed to adequately respond to inquiries from Stankowski and her father. Stankowski initiated suit against Ellis in small claims court and the matter settled for $382.25.

Ellis stipulates he violated SCR 3.130(1.3) (failing to diligently represent) and SCR 3.130(1.4)(a) (failing to inform).

KBA File 16056

In the spring of 2007, Ellis accepted $500.00 from Ronald Thompson to represent Thompson in a civil matter but Ellis did not diligently pursue the case, did not keep Thompson reasonably informed and did not return Thompson’s materials.

Ellis stipulates he violated SCR 3.130(1.3) (failing to diligently represent), SCR 3.130(1.4)(a) (failing to inform) and SCR 3.130(1.16)(d) (failing to return file).

*550 KBA File 16154

In 2005, Ellis agreed to represent Susan Arter in a probate matter but Ellis did not diligently pursue the matter, did not keep Arter reasonably informed and did not return her materials.

Ellis stipulates he violated SCR 3.130(1.8) (failing to diligently represent), SCR 3.130(1.4)(a) (failing to inform) and SCR 3.130(1.16)(d) (failing to return file).

KBA File 16249

In 2007, Ellis agreed to represent Margaret Durham in a bankruptcy matter but he failed to file the petition, failed to keep Durham reasonably informed and failed to return her file.

Ellis stipulates he violated SCR 3.130(1.3) (failing to diligently represent), SCR 3.130(1.4)(a) (failing to inform) and SCR 3.130(1.16)(d) (failing to return file).

KBA File 16562

In 2004, Ellis filed a civil suit on behalf of Mary Hand regarding her personal injury claim but did not diligently pursue the case or keep Hand adequately informed. The court dismissed Hand’s case on January 25, 2007, but Ellis misled Hand to believe the case was ongoing through May 2008. He also refused to return her file upon requests by both her and the KBA.

Ellis stipulates he violated SCR 3.130(1.3) (failing to diligently represent), SCR 3.130(1.4)(a) (failing to inform), SCR 3.130(1.16)(d) (failing to return file), SCR 3.130(8.3)(c) 4 (engaging in dishonest conduct) and SCR 3.130(8.1)(b) (failing to respond in disciplinary matter).

KBA File 16973

In late 2003, Ellis agreed to assist Craig Marguardo in setting aside a default judgment entered against Marguardo but Ellis failed to adequately proceed in the case, did not keep Marguardo informed and did not return Marguardo’s file.

Ellis stipulates he violated SCR 3.130(1.3) (failing to diligently represent), SCR 3.130(1.4)(a) (failing to inform) and SCR 3.130(1.16)(d) (failing to return file).

Prior Discipline

On January 31, 2008, Ellis was suspended for failing to pay his Bar dues for the 2007-2008 calendar year and for failing to complete his Continuing Legal Education (CLE) requirements for the 2006-2007 educational year. He has been suspended since this time.

On March 23, 2009, the KBA privately admonished Ellis for failing to properly represent a client after agreeing to do so and accepting a fee. When confronted by the client, Ellis filed the preliminary documents in the ease and returned a portion of the fee. On April 6, 2009, the KBA privately admonished Ellis for failing respond in a separate disciplinary matter.

On January 21, 2010, Ellis received two ninety-day suspensions, ordered to run concurrently, for misconduct in two cases. In the first case, Ellis inappropriately took money from a client when his fees were paid by the Commonwealth and he failed to respond in the disciplinary matter. In the second case, Ellis agreed to represent a client and collected a fee but never filed suit, failed to keep the client informed, retained the unearned fee and did not respond in the disciplinary matter. Kentucky Bar Association v. Ellis, 302 S.W.3d 75 (Ky.2010).

Trial Commissioner’s Report and Recommendation

All of the charges against Ellis were consolidated on February 9, 2010. The *551 parties began to prepare for a hearing before a trial commissioner but prior to the hearing Ellis and the KBA agreed to enter a joint stipulation of facts and Ellis admitted he violated the Rules as charged. The only issue left to the trial commissioner was determining the appropriate sanction. The trial commissioner thoughtfully considered the joint stipulation, the pertinent legal authority, and the aggravating and mitigating factors in reaching his recommendation that Ellis be suspended for thirty-seven months, which should run concurrently with his prior ninety-day suspension, and that he be required to return his clients’ files and pay the costs of this proceeding. When the proposed sanction is viewed in conjunction with Ellis’s previous suspensions, Ellis will have been suspended from January 2008 to May 2015, approximately seven years and four months. Thus, should Ellis seek reinstatement at the conclusion of his suspensions, he will have to comply with the requirements of SCR 8.500, 3.505, 3.510 and 3.675, which includes applying for reinstatement, being reviewed and recommended by both the Character and Fitness Committee and the Board of Governors, passing the reinstatement exam, fulfilling all CLE requirements, and being approved by this Court.

The trial commissioner’s recommended sanction is consistent with discipline this Court has imposed in similar cases. Kentucky Bar Association v. Burlew, 281 S.W.3d 768 (Ky.2009) (attorney with a history of four private admonitions, suspension for failure to pay dues and CLE noncompliance and an 181-day suspension for misconduct was suspended for three years for numerous rule violations in three disciplinary files); Kentucky Bar Association v. Hammond,

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

Related

Palmer v. Kentucky Bar Ass'n
398 S.W.3d 444 (Kentucky Supreme Court, 2013)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
365 S.W.3d 548, 2012 WL 1890383, 2012 Ky. LEXIS 65, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/kentucky-bar-assn-v-ellis-ky-2012.