CHARLES WILLIAM SHAVER V. KENTUCKY BAR ASSOCIATION
Annotate this Case
Download PDF
TO BE PUBLISHED
2007-SC-000311-KB
\\-\,
CHARLES WILLIAM SHAVER
V.
N .e
~~C- -
MOVANT
IN SUPREME COURT
RESPONDENT
KENTUCKY BAR ASSOCIATION
ORDER
Charles William Shaver (KBA ID #90226) has filed a motion for restoration to
Kentucky Bar Association (KBA) membership under SCR 3.500(1) . Movant's last
known bar roster address is 400 E. Main Street, #307 ; Louisville, Kentucky 40207. He
was admitted to practice law in the Commonwealth of Kentucky in May 2004 but was
suspended on December 16; 2005, for failure to comply with Continuing Legal
Education (CLE) requirements . At the time of his suspension, he had no disciplinary
investigations, complaints, or charges pending against him.
Movant filed his application for restoration on May 7, 2007, less than five years
after his original suspension date . With his application, the KBA received payment for
movant's restoration fee, dues, and late fees owed on his dues . He was CLE compliant
for purposes of the application at the time of the hearing and has since completed the
CLE requirements for the 2007-2008 year . At the time of his application, there were no
disciplinary matters pending against the movant; and he had not been the subject of any
claims against the Client Security Fund. The Board found that movant's application
satisfied all legal requirements for restoration, including affidavits sworn to by three Bar
y~k
.~ .
members in good standing, and found no impediments to restoration . Thus, the Board
voted unanimously to recommend movant's restoration to KBA membership and the
practice of law. We concur with the recommendation of the Board .
We order that the Movant, Charles William Shaver, KBA ID #90226, is hereby
restored to KBA membership and the practice of law in this Commonwealth, subject to
his payment of the costs of this proceeding in the amount of $290 .19 to the Kentucky
Bar Association, as required by SCR 3 .500 (5).
All sitting . All concur.
ENTERED : November 1, 2007.
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.
