Office of Disciplinary Counsel v. Luke
This text of Office of Disciplinary Counsel v. Luke (Office of Disciplinary Counsel v. Luke) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Hawaii Supreme Court primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.
Opinion
Electronically Filed Supreme Court SCAD-16-0000834 17-FEB-2017 01:01 PM
SCAD-16-0000834
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF HAWAI#I
OFFICE OF DISCIPLINARY COUNSEL, Petitioner,
vs.
KENDAL A. LUKE, Respondent.
ORIGINAL PROCEEDING (ODC 15-046-9265)
ORDER OF SUSPENSION (By: Recktenwald, C.J., Nakayama, McKenna, Pollack, and Wilson, JJ.)
Upon consideration of the Report and Recommendation of
the Disciplinary Board of the Supreme Court of the State of
Hawai#i, the stipulated facts, and the evidence in the record, we
conclude by clear and convincing evidence that Respondent
Kendal A. Luke violated Rules 3.5(c) and 4.4(a) of the Hawai#i
Rules of Professional Conduct (2014) by engaging in conduct
toward an unrepresented opposing party in the hallway of Family
Court that was highly offensive and included the repetition in a
loud voice of a vulgar, gender-based slur. While we concur with
the Disciplinary Board’s conclusions regarding Respondent Luke’s conduct, and concur that his conduct warrants a period of
suspension, as it was committed knowingly and injured the legal
profession and the system of justice of which he is a
representative, we conclude a more lengthy period of suspension
is warranted. Therefore,
IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Respondent Luke is suspended
from the practice of law in this jurisdiction for 90 days,
effective 30 days after the entry date of this order.
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Respondent Luke shall submit
an affidavit demonstrating compliance with RSCH Rule 2.16(d)
within 10 days after the effective date of his suspension.
proof to this court of his successful completion of the Multi-
State Professional Responsibility Examination, undertaken at his
own expense, within one year of the entry date of this order.
Respondent Luke is hereby notified that failure to provide such
proof within the allotted time may result in a further period of
suspension.
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Respondent Luke shall bear
the costs of the disciplinary proceedings, upon timely submission
by the Office of Disciplinary Counsel and approval by this court
of a verified bill of costs, pursuant to Rule 2.3(c) of the Rules
of the Supreme Court of the State of Hawai#i (RSCH).
2 IT IS FINALLY ORDERED that Respondent Luke is reminded
that he may not resume the practice of law until entry of an
order by this court, restoring his license, pursuant to RSCH
Rules 2.17(a) and 2.17(b)(2).
DATED: Honolulu, Hawai#i, February 17, 2017.
/s/ Mark E. Recktenwald
/s/ Paula A. Nakayama
/s/ Sabrina S. McKenna
/s/ Richard W. Pollack
/s/ Michael D. Wilson
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
Office of Disciplinary Counsel v. Luke, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/office-of-disciplinary-counsel-v-luke-haw-2017.