AN UNNAMED ATTORNEY V. KENTUCKY BAR ASSOCIATION
Annotate this Case
Download PDF
TO BE PUBLISHED
S5uprrittr Gurf Tfitnfuritv
2011-SC-000333-KB
MOVANT
AN UNNAMED ATTORNEY
V.
IN SUPREME COURT
KENTUCKY BAR ASSOCIATION
RESPONDENT
OPINION AND ORDER
Movant, An Unnamed Attorney,' is before this Court pursuant to SCR
3.480(2) with a negotiated sanction of a Private Reprimand With Conditions.
Upon review of the record, this Court accepts the negotiated sanction.
Movant was charged by the Inquiry Commission with a violation of
former SCR 3.130-1.15(b) 2 which required a lawyer to notify the client or third
parties with an interest of the receipt of settlement funds and to promptly
render an accounting to the client or third party with an interest.
The name of the Movant has been changed to protect the anonymity of the attorney
being reprimanded privately. Though the reprimand is private, the parties and the
Court believe other members of the bar will benefit from a published redacted
opinion disapproving the attorney's actions.
2
SCR 3.130-1.15(b) was amended in 2009, effective July15, 2009. The amendment is
a minor wording change that would not affect the results in this case.
The facts which give rise to the charge stem from the Movant's
representation of a client in a personal injury matter resulting from an
automobile accident. The Movant received a document entitled "Assignment of
Proceeds, Lien, and Authorization" from a chiropractor who treated the client.
Upon subsequent settlement of the case for $4,000.00, Movant deducted his
fee and distributed the remaining $2,600.00 to his client without notifying the
chiropractor of the settlement or distribution.
Movant admits he violated the above rule by not notifying the
chiropractor of the settlement, and in not escrowing the balance of the
settlement (after deducting his fee) for distribution to the client and the
chiropractor, according to their interests. In negotiating a penalty, the
Respondent was agreeable to a private reprimand if the Movant agreed to a
publication by the Court and the KBA of the Order of Private Reprimand,
redacting the Movant's name and any fact-specific identifying information in a
published opinion. The KBA's purpose in publication of a redacted private
reprimand is to educate members of the public and the bar concerning this
type of conduct and the ramifications therefrom. The Respondent also
requested the Movant attend the Ethics and Professionalism Enhancement
Program offered by the Office of Bar Counsel, and not receive any CLE credits
for this program. Movant is agreeable to the conditions. This Court does not
publish private reprimands but does enter confidential orders. The KBA places
a copy in the KBA member's file with all pertinent information, which remains
in the file for future reference, such as in subsequent disciplinary actions.
2
However, the Court is agreeable to publishing a redacted copy of the private
reprimand, and the Court is of the opinion that a private reprimand with
conditions is sufficient in this case. Therefore:
IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the Movant, An Unnamed Attorney, is
adjudicated guilty of one count of violating former SCR 3.130-1.15(b), and that
he be issued a Private Reprimand with these conditions:
1. Movant shall attend the next Ethics and Professionalism Enhancement
Program offered by the Office of Bar Counsel, separate and apart from
his fulfillment of any other continuing legal education requirements;
2 Movant will not apply for any CLE credit for attending said program, and
shall furnish a release and waiver to the Office of Bar Counsel to review
his records with the Continuing Legal Education Commission, such
release to continue in effect until one year after he completes said
program, in order to allow the OBC to verify that Movant has not
reported said program for any type of CLE credit;
3. Movant agrees to publication by this Court and the Kentucky Bar
Association of this Private Reprimand With Conditions, redacting the
Movant's name and any fact-identifying information of Movant; and
4. Movant shall pay the costs of these proceedings, as certified by the
Disciplinary Clerk, for which execution may issue upon finality of this
Order.
All sitting. All concur.
ENTERED: August 25, 2011.
4
TO BE PUBLISHED
cfirttfuritv
uprrtur 0.:ourf of q
2011-SC-000309-KB
MOVANT
ROBERT W. RILEY
V.
IN SUPREME COURT
KENTUCKY BAR ASSOCIATION
RESPONDENT
OPINION AND ORDER
Movant, Robert W. Riley, was admitted to the practice of law in the
Commonwealth of Kentucky on September 1, 1973. His KBA Member No. is
58570, and his current bar roster address is: Riley & Associates, 9400
Williamsburg Plaza, Suite 110, Louisville, Kentucky 40222-5097. Movant is
before this Court with a negotiated sanction under SCR 3.480(2).
The Inquiry Commission charged Movant with a violation of SCR 3.1301.7(b) for engaging a client in sexually explicit telephone conversations, and for
making a sexual advance towards the client while Movant was representing the
client in a class action, sometime in November and December of 2003. The
rule in question deals with conflicts of interest and loyalty to a client. At the
time charged, June 2, 2005, 1 SCR 3.130-1.7(b) read:
A lawyer shall not represent a client if the
representation of that client may be materially limited
by the lawyer's responsibilities to another client or to a
third person, or by the lawyer's own interests, unless:
(1) The lawyer reasonably believes the representation
will not be adversely affected; and (2) The client
consents after consultation. When representation of
multiple clients in a single matter is undertaken, the
consultation shall include explanation of the
implications of the common representation and the
advantages and risks involved.
In this case the client turned down the attorney's advances and notified the
firm that she was going elsewhere for representation. The client stayed with
the firm after a partner in the firm talked to the client and reassigned the claim
to another member of the firm.
Movant and the KBA have negotiated a sanction pursuant to SCR
3.480(2). Accordingly, Movant admits a violation of SCR 3.130-1.7(b) and
requests this Court impose a public reprimand. The Kentucky Bar Association
filed a response agreeing to a public reprimand, with costs.
A review of Movant's record reveals three prior private reprimands for
matters not similar to the facts in this case. In the case before us, the client
turned Movant down and Movant was soon taken off the case. There is no
allegation that other members of the class or the client involved were
prejudiced by a conflict of interest, and Movant admits he erred in his
professional conduct. Case law on SCR 3.130-1.7(b) prior to the 2009
1
Amended effective July 15, 2009.
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.