In re Geniuk
Decision Date | 23 February 2018 |
Docket Number | No. 118,226,118,226 |
Citation | 411 P.3d 320,307 Kan. 509 |
Parties | In the MATTER OF Kenneth J. GENIUK, Respondent. |
Court | Kansas Supreme Court |
Danielle M. Hall, Deputy Disciplinary Administrator, argued the cause, and Stanton A. Hazlett, Disciplinary Administrator, was with her on the formal complaint for the petitioner.
No appearance by respondent.
This is an original proceeding in discipline filed by the office of the Disciplinary Administrator against the respondent, Kenneth J. Geniuk, of Gladstone, Missouri, an attorney admitted to the practice of law in Kansas in 2007.
On April 11, 2017, the office of the Disciplinary Administrator filed a formal complaint against the respondent alleging violations of the Kansas Rules of Professional Conduct (KRPC). The respondent did not file an answer. A hearing was held on the complaint before a panel of the Kansas Board for Discipline of Attorneys on June 13, 2017, where the respondent did not appear. The hearing panel determined that respondent violated KRPC 5.5(a) and (b) (2018 Kan. S. Ct. R. 363) (unauthorized practice of law); 7.1(a) (2018 Kan. S. Ct. R. 372) ( ); 8.3(a) (2018 Kan. S. Ct. R. 380) (reporting professional misconduct); 8.4(d) (2018 Kan. S. Ct. R. 381) ( ); Kansas Supreme Court Rule 207(c) (2018 Kan. S. Ct. R. 246) (failure to report action); Kansas Supreme Court Rule 208(c) (2018 Kan. S. Ct. R. 246) (failure to notify Clerk of the Appellate Courts of change of address); and Kansas Supreme Court Rule 211(b) (2018 Kan. S. Ct. R. 251) (failure to file answer in disciplinary proceeding).
Upon conclusion of the hearing, the panel made the following findings of fact and conclusions of law, together with its recommendation to this court:
To continue reading
Request your trial-
In re Davisson
...again recommended disbarment. The respondent failed to appear, which may be considered an additional aggravator. See In re Geniuk , 307 Kan. 509, 520, 411 P.3d 320 (2018) ; In re O'Leary , 303 Kan. 456, 463, 362 P.3d 1092 (2015).The hearing panel's recommendations are advisory only and do n......
-
Hired Opinions: Ethics and Expert Witnesses
...395, 969 P.2d 892 (1998); In re Knox, 309 Kan. 167, 432 P.3d 654 (2019); In re Krogh, 259 Kan. 163, 910 P.2d 221 (1996); In re Geniuk, 307 Kan. 509, 411 P.3d 320 (2018). [32] Kumho Tire v Carmichael, 526 U.S. 137, 119 S.Ct. 1167, 143 L.Ed.2d 238 (1999) (emphasis added). [33] See, e.g. Jense......
-
The Fine Art of Self-promotion: a Primer on Modern Lawyer Advertising Under the Kansas Rules of Professional Conduct
...[32] In re Barker, 302 Kan. 156, 160, 351 P.3d 1256 (2015). [33] In re Franco, 275 Kan. 571, 577, 66 P.3d 805 (2003); In re Geniuk, 307 Kan. 509, 411 P.3d 320, 327 (2018). [34] In re Daniels, 284 Kan. 220, 159 P.3d 995, 1002 (2007). [35] See also, In re Weaver, 294 Kan. 751, 281 P.2d 502 (2......