In re Hawkins
304 Kan. 97
| Kan. | 2016Background
- Joan M. Hawkins, Kansas lawyer admitted 1999, was the subject of four disciplinary matters (DA11619, DA11637, DA11730, DA11918) alleging multiple KRPC violations based on conduct in family-law and protection-from-abuse matters.
- Key factual allegations included: (1) telling a court clerk she and her client would not attend a May 9, 2012 hearing (but later appearing); (2) filing a temporary parenting plan and order that she represented as approved by opposing counsel when it was not; (3) withholding and failing to timely forward client documents (psychological evaluation, police reports, quitclaim deed) and delaying return of unearned fees; (4) directing a client not to answer deposition questions and failing to comply promptly with discovery/court orders; and (5) failing to timely produce files and trust-account records during a disciplinary investigation.
- The Kansas Board hearing panel found violations of KRPC 1.16(d), 3.2, 3.3(a)(1), 3.4(d), 8.1(b), 8.4(c), and 8.4(d) across the matters, recommended an 18‑month suspension (one panel member favored 12 months).
- Hawkins disputed the panel findings, arguing the evidence did not meet the clear-and-convincing standard for many alleged violations and offered alternative explanations for delays and communications.
- The Kansas Supreme Court reviewed the panel record (deferring to credibility findings where supported by clear and convincing evidence), rejected some panel conclusions but sustained multiple violations, and ordered an 18‑month suspension effective on the opinion date; costs assessed to Hawkins.
Issues
| Issue | Disciplinary Administrator's Argument | Hawkins' Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Duty on termination of representation (KRPC 1.16(d)) | Hawkins failed to protect client interests by not timely forwarding psychological/police reports to successor counsel and by delaying return of unearned fees | Delay was reasonable given client communications; successor counsel said docs ultimately were unnecessary | Court upheld violation: failure to forward reports and delayed refund supported by record |
| Candor to tribunal / dishonesty (KRPC 3.3; 8.4(c)) | Hawkins knowingly made false statements to court/staff (denying telling clerk she would not attend; falsely claiming opposing counsel approved orders) | Conflicting testimony; Hawkins denied making the false statements and claimed miscommunication | Court sustained violations based on panel credibility findings supported by clear and convincing evidence |
| Expediting litigation / discovery and prejudicial conduct (KRPC 3.2; 3.4(d); 8.4(d)) | Hawkins caused unnecessary delays, filed a parenting plan not reflecting client, withheld documents (e.g., quitclaim deed), instructed client not to answer deposition questions, and disobeyed discovery orders | Some actions were strategic negotiation choices or disputed; withholding quitclaim deed to protect appeal was tactical; adoption-record sanction was reversed on appeal | Court sustained violations for failing to expedite (in part) and for improper deposition instruction; panel finding about withholding quitclaim deed was rejected where record insufficient |
| Cooperation with disciplinary investigation (KRPC 8.1(b)) | Hawkins knowingly failed to timely provide requested file materials and trust-account records to the investigator | Hawkins eventually produced records and argued full compliance occurred | Court held that Hawkins’ untimely and incomplete responses violated KRPC 8.1(b) |
Key Cases Cited
- In re Foster, 292 Kan. 940 (court states misconduct must be proved by clear and convincing evidence)
- In re Lober, 288 Kan. 498 (definition of clear and convincing standard)
- In re Trester, 285 Kan. 404 (court defers to panel findings supported by clear and convincing evidence)
- In re Barker, 299 Kan. 158 (court explains appellate review does not reweigh credibility; reviews for clear and convincing support)
- In re Kline, 298 Kan. 96 (discusses ABA Standards and mental-state distinctions)
- In re Shriver, 294 Kan. 617 (same conduct can support violations of both KRPC 3.3 and 8.4(c))
- In re Rumsey, 301 Kan. 438 (example of discipline analysis and use of probation as remedy)