Indefinite Suspension of Attorney Terence A. Lober: Establishing Strict Standards for Legal Representation

Introduction

The Supreme Court of Kansas issued a significant ruling on April 3, 2009, in the case of In the Matter of Terence A. Lober, Respondent (No. 101,212). This case centers around Terence A. Lober, an attorney who has been practicing law in Kansas since September 1979, and his disciplinary proceedings leading to an indefinite suspension. The key issues involve multiple violations of professional conduct rules, lack of communication, and a pattern of misconduct that ultimately resulted in the suspension of his law license.

Summary of the Judgment

The original proceeding in discipline was filed by the Disciplinary Administrator against Terence A. Lober due to alleged violations of several Kansas Rules of Professional Conduct (KRPC). Despite the formal complaint, Lober did not appear for the hearing or respond to the complaint. After reviewing the evidence, the hearing panel concluded that Lober had violated KRPC 1.1, 1.2, 1.3, 1.4(a), 3.2, 8.4(d), and 8.4(g), as well as Kansas Supreme Court Rule 211(b). The panel unanimously recommended disbarment; however, the Supreme Court ultimately decided on an indefinite suspension, citing Lober's extensive history of misconduct and lack of participation in disciplinary proceedings.

Analysis

Precedents Cited

The judgment references several past cases and rules to establish the basis for Lober's suspension. Notably, it cites IN RE LOBER (266 Kan. 404, 969 P.2d 885 (1998)) and IN RE LOBER (276 Kan. 633, 78 P.3d 442 (2003)), which detail previous disciplinary actions against Lober for similar violations. These precedents demonstrate a consistent pattern of misconduct, influencing the court's decision to escalate the sanctions.

Legal Reasoning

The court's decision was grounded in the clear and convincing evidence standard required for attorney misconduct (Supreme Court Rule 211(f)). The hearing panel meticulously evaluated the violations against various KRPC rules:

KRPC 1.1 (Competence): Lober failed to provide thorough representation by not achieving service of process on a defendant and not filing a necessary Journal Entry of Judgment timely.
KRPC 1.2 (Scope of Representation): He did not act appropriately to achieve his clients' objectives, such as allowing dismissals without client consent.
KRPC 1.3 (Diligence): His lack of promptness and reasonable efforts in representing his clients resulted in significant setbacks in their case.
KRPC 1.4(a) (Communication): Lober failed to keep his clients informed, neglecting their requests for updates.
KRPC 3.2 (Expediting Litigation): His inaction nearly caused loss of judgment in a prior case against defendants.
KRPC 8.4(d) & (g) (Misconduct): His conduct prejudiced the administration of justice and reflected poorly on his fitness to practice law.
Kansas Supreme Court Rule 211(b): Lober failed to respond to the formal complaint within the required timeframe.

Additionally, the court considered the American Bar Association's Standards for Imposing Lawyer Sanctions, assessing factors such as duty violated, mental state, injury caused, and aggravating or mitigating circumstances.

Impact

This judgment underscores the Kansas legal system's commitment to maintaining high standards of professional conduct among attorneys. The indefinite suspension serves as a stern reminder that repeated violations and lack of cooperation with disciplinary processes will result in severe consequences. Future cases involving attorney misconduct will likely reference this judgment, particularly regarding the importance of diligence, communication, and adherence to professional responsibilities.

Complex Concepts Simplified

Kansas Rules of Professional Conduct (KRPC)

The KRPC are guidelines that govern the ethical and professional behavior of attorneys in Kansas. Key rules violated in this case include:

Competence (KRPC 1.1): Attorneys must possess the necessary knowledge and skills to represent their clients effectively.
Scope of Representation (KRPC 1.2): Lawyers should follow their clients' decisions regarding the objectives of representation and consult them on the means to achieve those objectives.
Diligence (KRPC 1.3): Attorneys must act with reasonable promptness and dedication to their clients' cases.
Communication (KRPC 1.4(a)): Lawyers are required to keep clients informed about their case and promptly respond to client inquiries.
Expediting Litigation (KRPC 3.2): Lawyers must make reasonable efforts to speed up litigation in a manner consistent with the client's interests.
Misconduct (KRPC 8.4(d) & (g)): Lawyers must avoid actions that undermine the integrity of the legal system or reflect poorly on their ability to practice law.

Indefinite Suspension

An indefinite suspension means that the attorney's license to practice law is revoked without a set end date. The attorney must apply for reinstatement, demonstrating remediation of misconduct before being allowed to practice again.

Conclusion

The Supreme Court of Kansas' decision to indefinitely suspend Terence A. Lober's law license serves as a crucial precedent in upholding stringent ethical standards within the legal profession. Lober's repeated violations of professional conduct rules, combined with his lack of cooperation in disciplinary proceedings, highlight the court's zero-tolerance policy towards attorney misconduct. This judgment reinforces the necessity for lawyers to maintain competence, diligence, and transparent communication with clients, thereby safeguarding the integrity of the legal system and ensuring trust in legal representation.