Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist

250 Kan. 286

In re Johnson

Supreme Court of Kansas

Decided January 17, 1992

Supreme Court of Kansas · decided 1992-01-17

Cited by 1 later decisions — most recently June 1995

1 state decisions

Relies on In Re the Complaints Against Johnson

Good law ✅— No negative treatment on recordhow we know

Decided 1992-01-17

View the full empirical analysis of this case →

Per Curiam.:

¶1This is an original proceeding in discipline filed by the Office of the Disciplinary Administrator against Leo N. Johnson, of Council Grove, an attorney admitted to the practice of law in Kansas.

¶2Count I of the formal complaint alleges the negligent handling of a criminal case. A panel of the Board for Discipline of Attorneys found that the allegations in this count had not been established by clear and convincing evidence.

¶3Count II alleges that respondent violated Supreme Court Rule 207 (1991 Kan. Ct. R. Annot. 149) by failing to cooperate in the investigation of Count I. Respondent admitted the allegations contained in Count II. Respondent was indefinitely suspended from the practice of law in 1980 (In re Johnson, 227 Kan. 478, 608 P.2d 1012 [1980]) and subsequently was reinstated. For respondent’s failure to cooperate in the investigation herein and in light of his "prior violations of the ethical rules,” the panel recommended that respondent be disciplined by public censure. No exceptions to the report have been filed. We accept the panel’s recommendation.

¶4It Is Therefore Ordered that Leo N. Johnson be and he is hereby disciplined by public censure.

¶5It Is Further Ordered that this order shall be published in the official Kansas Reports and that the costs herein be assessed to respondent.

/250/kan/286 · .json · Public domain