Kevin So v. Leonard Suchanek
399 U.S. App. D.C. 374
D.C. Cir.2012Background
- Suchanek allegedly violated DC ethics rules while representing So and Land Base in a 2006 conflict; he also represented Lu, So, and Land Base in overlapping matters.
- Suchanek prepared a Land Base opinion and coordinated a multinational litigation campaign, while holding a trust account handling So’s funds.
- So discovered Lu’s misconduct and So’s funds; Suchanek urged continued joint representation despite conflicts.
- The district court found two conflict periods: July–August 2006 and August 2007–January 2008, and ordered disgorgement of $400,000 plus interest.
- So sought additional disgorgement of funds Suchanek paid to himself; the district court denied and Suchanek appealed; So cross-appealed seeking more remedies.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether conflict periods were properly identified. | So argues conflicts existed from start to finish. | Suchanek contends only two explicit periods involved conflicts. | Remand to reassess conflicts in full; broader scope of disgorgement warranted. |
| Whether Rule 1.7 violations support full fiduciary disgorgement. | So seeks complete disgorgement for all conflicts. | Suchanek argues limited remedy. | District court erred; remand for supplemental remedy beyond $400,000. |
| Whether post-judgment turnover was proper. | So contends enforcement was correct. | Suchanek argues stay/bond procedures. | Remand to determine appropriate security and turnover. |
| Whether denial of post-judgment stay stands given cross-appeal. | So cross-appeal affects only the other divisive portion of judgment. | Suchanek could not stay all or part without bond. | Remand consistent with divisible-judgment exception; review of remedy required. |
Key Cases Cited
- Griva v. Davison, 637 A.2d 830 (D.C. 1994) (ethics violations can breach fiduciary duty)
- Hendry v. Pelland, 73 F.3d 397 (D.C. Cir. 1996) (undivided loyalty; conflict of interest duties)
- Television Capital Corp. of Mobile v. Paxson Commc’ns Corp., 894 A.2d 461 (D.C. 2006) (ethics violations may breach fiduciary duties)
- Price v. Franklin Investment Co., 574 F.2d 594 (D.C. Cir. 1978) (divisible-judgment exception to stay rule)
- BASF Corp. v. Old World Trading Co., 979 F.2d 615 (7th Cir. 1992) (remedies for attorney misconduct; disgorgement)