Price, Matter of

Citation241 Kan. 836,739 P.2d 938
Decision Date17 July 1987
Docket NumberNo. 60625,60625
PartiesIn the Matter of Douglas A. PRICE, Respondent.
CourtUnited States State Supreme Court of Kansas

Stanton A. Hazlett, Disciplinary Counsel, appeared for the Disciplinary Administrator.

There was no appearance by respondent.

PER CURIAM:

This original action in discipline was filed by the office of the Disciplinary Administrator against Douglas A. Price of Humboldt. Respondent has been the subject of several prior disciplinary proceedings and has been suspended from the practice of law in Kansas since July 9, 1985. In re Price, 237 Kan. 624, 701 P.2d 1337 (1985); In re Price, 238 Kan. 426, 709 P.2d 986 (1985).

The instant complaint is based upon respondent's representation, or lack thereof, in the matter of the Estate of Merle K. Bagnall, deceased, in the District Court of Allen County. After being notified of the complaint filed against him, respondent totally failed to respond or to cooperate with the office of the Disciplinary Administrator. He failed to appear before the panel of the Board for Discipline of Attorneys and failed to appear before this court when ordered to do so. Such failure constitutes a clear violation of Supreme Court Rule 207 (235 Kan. cxxvi). State v. Savaiano, 234 Kan. 268, 670 P.2d 1359 (1983). It is noted that respondent showed similar disdain for the rules of this court and the Code of Professional Responsibility in the previous actions.

The panel in this case found the respondent neglected the probate proceedings in the Bagnall estate which he originally filed on August 14, 1981. It found:

"[T]he Respondent has failed, refused and neglected to complete the matters pertaining to the estate, although he has been requested to do so. There has been no accounting nor determination of heirship. There has been no report of either Kansas inheritance tax or federal estate tax prepared by the Respondent. The estate has incurred a Kansas inheritance tax liability for interest of $1,643.75 due to delinquent reporting."

The panel unanimously found that Respondent violated DR 6-101(A)(3) (235 Kan. cxlvii) in that he neglected a legal matter entrusted to him and recommended that respondent be disbarred. We agree.

Respondent, for the last several years, has shown a total lack of responsibility in representing his clients as is demonstrated by the earlier cases. He has shown no respect for his oath as an attorney or for the courts in which he has appeared. Respondent's repeated neglect of his...

To continue reading

Request your trial
3 cases
  • Petition of Pringle, 55316
    • United States
    • Kansas Supreme Court
    • 10 Abril 1991
    ...as may be requested of them." Failure of a lawyer to abide by Rule 207 can result in the imposition of discipline. See In re Price, 241 Kan. 836, 739 P.2d 938 (1987), and State v. Savaiano, 234 Kan. 268, 670 P.2d 1359 The information and assistance requested from respondent Bobby Lee Pringl......
  • Anderson, Matter of, 64564
    • United States
    • Kansas Supreme Court
    • 13 Julio 1990
    ...discipline for attorneys. Respondent, in his brief, asserts that the Standards have "no weight in the law." However, in In re Price, 241 Kan. 836, 739 P.2d 938 (1987), this court specifically relied on the Standards in its decision to disbar Mr. Price. We cited the Standards in supporting t......
  • Potter, Matter of
    • United States
    • Kansas Supreme Court
    • 23 Enero 1998
    ...disciplinary administrator, or to appear as ordered before a hearing panel, constitutes a violation of Rule 207. See In re Price, 241 Kan. 836, 836, 739 P.2d 938 (1987). Respondent clearly violated [Supreme Court Rules] 207 and 211(b) by failing to participate in the hearing and by failing ......

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