Kentucky Bar Ass'n v. Harris

Kentucky Supreme Court

Kentucky Bar Ass'n v. Harris

809 S.W.2d 851, 1991 Ky. LEXIS 27, 1991 WL 81127

CourtKentucky Supreme Court

DecidedApril 11, 1991

DocketNo. 91-SC-224-KB

StatusPublished

Cited by2 cases

This text of 809 S.W.2d 851 (Kentucky Bar Ass'n v. Harris) 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. Harris, 809 S.W.2d 851, 1991 Ky. LEXIS 27, 1991 WL 81127 (Ky. 1991).

Pincite

Opinion

OPINION AND ORDER OF PUBLIC REPRIMAND

James T. Harris has been charged in a disciplinary proceeding before the Kentucky Bar Association with violation of Disciplinary Rule 6-101(A)(2) and (3) of the Code of Professional Responsibility which prohibits handling a matter without preparation adequate under the circumstances and neglect of a legal matter. The Inquiry Tribunal alleged that Harris filed a civil action in Perry Circuit Court in 1982, and that a summons was issued and given to Harris for service upon the defendant and movant failed to effect service until after the trial court entered an order dismissing the action pursuant to CR 77.02, which was seventeen months after the complaint was filed. The Inquiry Tribunal further charged Harris failed to adequately inform his client of the dismissal of the civil action by Perry Circuit Court and failed to advise his client of the opinion of the Court of Appeals which upheld the order of Perry Circuit Court.

Harris, both by answer and his motion for public reprimand, acknowledges that he failed to effect prompt service of the summons and failed to communicate with his client. Harris alleged mitigating circumstances. The Kentucky Bar Association has no objection to the issuance of a public reprimand against Harris.

The movant’s motion to issue a public reprimand is granted. James T. Harris is publicly reprimanded for his failure to handle a legal matter without preparation adequate under the circumstances; neglecting a legal matter entrusted to him; and for failure to inform his client of the dismissal of his civil action or of the decision of the Kentucky Court of Appeals.

It is ordered that all disciplinary proceedings against James T. Harris and the costs thereof be paid by the movant pursuant to SCR 3.450.

All concur.

Entered: April 11, 1991.

/s/ Robert F. Stephens Chief Justice

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

OPINION AND ORDER OF PUBLIC REPRIMAND

James T. Harris has been charged in a disciplinary proceeding before the Kentucky Bar Association with violation of Disciplinary Rule 6-101(A)(2) and (3) of the Code of Professional Responsibility which prohibits handling a matter without preparation adequate under the circumstances and neglect of a legal matter. The Inquiry Tribunal alleged that Harris filed a civil action in Perry Circuit Court in 1982, and that a summons was issued and given to Harris for service upon the defendant and movant failed to effect service until after the trial court entered an order dismissing the action pursuant to CR 77.02, which was seventeen months after the complaint was filed. The Inquiry Tribunal further charged Harris failed to adequately inform his client of the dismissal of the civil action by Perry Circuit Court and failed to advise his client of the opinion of the Court of Appeals which upheld the order of Perry Circuit Court.

Harris, both by answer and his motion for public reprimand, acknowledges that he failed to effect prompt service of the summons and failed to communicate with his client. Harris alleged mitigating circumstances. The Kentucky Bar Association has no objection to the issuance of a public reprimand against Harris.

The movant’s motion to issue a public reprimand is granted. James T. Harris is publicly reprimanded for his failure to handle a legal matter without preparation adequate under the circumstances; neglecting a legal matter entrusted to him; and for failure to inform his client of the dismissal of his civil action or of the decision of the Kentucky Court of Appeals.

It is ordered that all disciplinary proceedings against James T. Harris and the costs thereof be paid by the movant pursuant to SCR 3.450.

All concur.

Entered: April 11, 1991.

/s/ Robert F. Stephens Chief Justice

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

809 S.W.2d 851, 1991 Ky. LEXIS 27, 1991 WL 81127, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/kentucky-bar-assn-v-harris-ky-1991.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack