404 S.W.3d 841
Ky.2013Background
- Blum appeals a unanimous Board of Governors decision finding him guilty of misconduct and imposing 181-day suspension with ethics training and impairment assessment.
- Charges arose from Blum’s handling of Dixon’s teacher-termination dispute, including aggressive pleadings and attacks in state and federal proceedings.
- The Inquiry Commission issued five counts alleging violations of SCR 3.130 rules, including 3.4(c), 3.4(f), 3.5(c), 3.1, and 8.2(a).
- The proceedings relied on collateral estoppel to prevent relitigation of Dixon merits, which Blum challenged but this Court upheld as proper in disciplinary context.
- The Board adopted the trial commissioner’s findings, and the Court affirmed guilt on three counts and imposed 181 days’ suspension with mandatory ethics, impairment, and counseling requirements.
- Blum’s sanctions and postures cite prior KBA discipline and aggravating factors, and the Court ordered reinstatement review by the Character and Fitness Committee.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Collateral estoppel validity in disciplinary action | Blum argues collateral estoppel prevents meaningful defense | KBA argues disciplinary judgments can rely on prior court findings | Collateral estoppel proper; no relitigation of merits in discipline |
| Whether Blum violated SCR 3.130-3.4(c) | Blum claims no tribunal rule obligation was disobeyed | KBA asserts disregard of court admonitions constitutes violation | Not guilty of SCR 3.130-3.4(c) |
| Whether Blum violated SCR 3.130-3.4(f) | Blum argues no improper threat used to gain advantage | KBA asserts threats to trigger disciplinary charges to gain advantage | Guilty of SCR 3.130-3.4(f) |
| Whether Blum violated SCR 3.130-3.5(c) | Blum contends no conduct to disrupt tribunal | KBA shows repetitive, disruptive filings burdening proceedings | Guilty of SCR 3.130-3.5(c) |
| Whether Blum violated SCR 3.130-8.2(a) | Blum argues statements were necessary pleadings | KBA contends statements were false or reckless | Guilty of SCR 3.130-8.2(a) |
Key Cases Cited
- Kentucky Bar Ass’n v. Berry, 626 S.W.2d 632 (Ky. 1981) (discipline for improper conduct; limits on truth and claims in proceedings)
- Kentucky Bar Ass’n v. Waller, 929 S.W.2d 181 (Ky. 1996) (discipline to promote integrity of judiciary outweighs First Amendment rights)
- Kentucky Bar Ass’n v. Lewis, 282 S.W.2d 321 (Ky. 1955) (early authority on bar discipline and conduct)
- Greene v. Kentucky Bar Ass’n, 386 S.W.3d 717 (Ky. 2012) (discussion of res judicata/collateral estoppel in discipline)
- Bierbauer v. Kentucky Bar Ass’n, 282 S.W.3d 318 (Ky. 2009) (aggravating factors and disciplined conduct)