KENTUCKY BAR ASSOCIATION V. ROGER DAVID LAING
Annotate this Case
Download PDF
TO BE PUBLISHED
KENTUCKY BAR ASSOCIATION
IN SUPREME COURT
V.
RESPONDENT
ROGER DAVID LAING
OPINION AND ORDER
The Kentucky Bar Association charged the respondent, Roger David Laing
(herinafter “Laing”), whose last known address was Frankfort, Kentucky, with three
violations of the Kentucky Rules of Professional Conduct arising out of Laing’s
representation of a client in a domestic relations matter. The client filed a complaint
with the Kentucky Bar Association alleging that she had paid Laing to file a motion
seeking an increase in the child support she received, and that Laing failed to do so
and failed to keep her informed regarding the matter. The three counts of professional
misconduct alleged by the Kentucky Bar Association alleged that Laing violated: (1)
SCR 3.130-I .3 by failing to act with reasonable diligence and promptness in his
representation of the client, (2) SCR 3.130-I .4(a) by failing to keep his client reasonably
informed about the status of his representation, and (3) SCR 3.130-8.3(c) by engaging
in conduct involving dishonesty, fraud, deceit or misrepresentation.
Laing admitted to his misconduct in Counts One and Two and agreed that he
had failed to file the motion and to keep his client reasonably informed regarding the
representation, but denied the alleged violation of SCR 3.130-8.3(c) because he
claimed that he had not knowingly misled the client regarding his plans to file the
motion.
A Trial Commissioner held a hearing on the alleged violations in March of
2000. The testimony at that hearing indicated that the client hired Laing in March 1999
to file a motion asking the Franklin Circuit Court to increase the amount of child support
she received. On March 17, 2000 when Laing was paid by check for his services, Laing
told the client that he would file the motion the following day. Laing never filed the
motion, and, other than a conversation in May 2000 in which he again indicated his
intention to file the motion imminently, did not communicate with the client.
After the
client filed a complaint with the Kentucky Bar Association, Laing returned the money he
had been paid.
The Trial Commissioner found that Laing violated the Kentucky Rules of
Professional Conduct as alleged in Counts I through III and recommended that Laing
be publicly reprimanded for his conduct. Neither Laing nor the Kentucky Bar
Association appealed the Commissioner’s findings, and the case was passed directly to
this Court pursuant to SCR 3.360(4).
After a review of the record, we accept the Trial
Commissioner’s recommendation. Accordingly, it is hereby ORDERED that:
1. The respondent, Roger David Laing, is hereby publicly reprimanded for his
professional misconduct.
2. In accordance with SCR 3.450(l), the respondent is directed to pay the costs
of this action in the amount of $359.34 for which execution may issue from this Court
upon finality of this Order.
-2-
All concur.
Entered: August 24, 2000
-3-
Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
