In re King, 16013.

Decision Date03 May 2013
Docket NumberNo. 16013.,16013.
Citation300 P.3d 643,297 Kan. 208
PartiesIn the Matter of Jon Michael KING, Respondent.
CourtKansas Supreme Court
OPINION TEXT STARTS HERE
ORDER OF DISBARMENT

In a letter signed on May 3, 2013, addressed to the Clerk of the Appellate Courts, respondent Jon Michael King of Lawrence, Kansas, an attorney admitted to the practice of law in the state of Kansas, voluntarily surrendered his license to practice law in Kansas, pursuant to Supreme Court Rule 217 (2012 Kan. Ct. R. Annot. 389) as amended December 1, 2012.

At the time the respondent surrendered his license, he was pending a panel hearing on a complaint in accordance with Supreme Court Rule 211 (2012 Kan. Ct. R. Annot. 350). The complaint concerns allegations of misconduct that respondent violated Rules 1.5 (unreasonable fees) (2012 Kan. Ct. R. Annot. 492), 1.7 (conflict of interest) (2012 Kan. Ct. R. Annot. 506), 1.13 (organization as client) (2012 Kan. Ct. R. Annot. 536), 1.15 (trust account and record keeping) (2012 Kan. Ct. R. Annot. 541), and 8.4 (misconduct) (2012 Kan. Ct. R. Annot. 643) of the Kansas Rules of Professional Conduct.

This court, having examined the files of the office of the Disciplinary Administrator, finds that the surrender of the respondent's license should be accepted and that the respondent should be disbarred.

IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED that Jon Michael King, be and is hereby disbarred from the practice of law in Kansas and his license and privilege to practice law are hereby revoked.

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the Clerk of the Appellate Courts strike the name of Jon Michael King from the roll of attorneys licensed to practice law in Kansas.

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that this order shall be published in the Kansas Reports, that the costs herein shall be assessed to the respondent, and that the respondent forthwith shall comply with Supreme Court Rule 218 (2012 Kan. Ct. R. Annot. 397) as amended December 1, 2012.

To continue reading

Request your trial
2 cases
  • Martin v. Naik
    • United States
    • Kansas Supreme Court
    • May 3, 2013
  • Reardon v. King
    • United States
    • Kansas Supreme Court
    • November 15, 2019
    ...in attorney fees during his employment at TCK. As a result, King voluntarily surrendered his license to practice law. See In re King , 297 Kan. 208, 300 P.3d 643 (2013). Soon after, Parsons filed a lawsuit against TCK and King, asserting various theories of liability. The case went to trial......

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT