Categories: Kansas Court Opinions

IN RE PENDERGRAFT, 237 Kan. 409 (1985)

701 P.2d 331

In the Matter of Marvin C. Pendergraft, Respondent.

Bar Docket No. 07152Supreme Court of Kansas
June 4, 1985

ORDER OF DISBARMENT

ATTORNEY AND CLIENT — Disciplinary Proceeding — Disbarment.

On March 2, 1985, Marvin C. Pendergraft, an attorney admitted to the practice of law in Kansas, was disciplined by this court by public censure for two complaints in which he had neglected a legal matter entrusted to him in violation of DR 6-101(A)(3) (235 Kan. cxlvii). In re Pendergraft, 236 Kan. 870, 695 P.2d 1289
(1985).

On February 15, 1985, Jerry W. Standrich filed a complaint with the disciplinary administrator alleging respondent had failed to refund $2,462.17 due the complainant.

On March 1, 1985, Alice Marie Fields filed a complaint with the disciplinary administrator alleging respondent had settled an automobile injury claim for her on December 28, 1984, for $28,000.00 and failed to remit her portion of the proceeds.

On March 21, 1985, Kevin W. Hunt filed a complaint with the disciplinary administrator alleging respondent had neglected a criminal matter entrusted to him and upon termination of respondent’s services he failed to account for money previously paid to respondent.

On May 15, 1985, respondent notified the Clerk of the Appellate Courts that he desired to surrender his license and privilege to practice law in the State of Kansas.

The Court, having examined the files and records herein, finds that pursuant to Supreme Court Rule 217 (235 Kan. cxxxii), Marvin C. Pendergraft should be disbarred from the practice of law in the State of Kansas.

IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED that Marvin C. Pendergraft be and he is hereby disbarred from the practice of law in the State of Kansas and his license and privilege to practice law are hereby revoked.

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the Clerk of the Appellate Courts shall strike the name of Marvin C. Pendergraft from the roll of attorneys licensed to practice law in Kansas and shall otherwise comply with the provisions of Rule 217.

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the costs of this proceeding are assessed to respondent and that a copy of this order shall be published in the official Kansas Reports.

EFFECTIVE this 4th day of June, 1985.

Page 410

jdjungle

Share
Published by
jdjungle
Tags: 701 P.2d 331

Recent Posts

IN RE PISTOTNIK, 512 P.3d 729 (2022)

512 P.3d 729 (2022) In the MATTER OF Bradley A. PISTOTNIK, Respondent. No. 124,868.Supreme Court…

2 years ago

BROWN v. OLIVER, 123 Kan. 711 (1927)

256 P. 1008 (1927) 123 Kan. 711 Supreme Court of Kansas. BROWN v. OLIVER. No.…

7 years ago

STATE v. SMITH, 223 Kan. 192 (1977)

573 P.2d 985 STATE OF KANSAS, Appellee, v. WILLIAM F. SMITH, Appellant. No. 48,641Supreme Court…

9 years ago

KING v. STATE, 287 Kan. 765 (2008)

King v. State. No. 97,931.Supreme Court of Kansas. November 4, 2008. Appeal from the Unpublished.…

9 years ago

LUTTRELL v. UNITED TELEPHONE SYSTEM, INC., 9 Kan. App. 2d 620 (1984)

683 P.2d 1292 MARVIN G. LUTTRELL, Appellant, v. UNITED TELEPHONE SYSTEM, INC., Appellee. No. 56,031Court…

9 years ago

KILEY v. PETSMART, INC., 277 Kan. 924 (2004)

KILEY v. PETSMART, INC. No. 89,893.Supreme Court of Kansas. March 31, 2004. Reported below 32…

9 years ago