STATE ex rel. OKLAHOMA BAR ASSOCIATION v. KERR
2017 OK 86
| Okla. | 2017Background
- Robert Samuel Kerr, IV submitted an affidavit resigning from the Oklahoma Bar Association on October 12, 2017; the resignation was filed in the Oklahoma Supreme Court on October 13, 2017.
- The resignation was voluntarily executed, with Kerr acknowledging awareness of the consequences and waiving rights to contest allegations.
- The Bar Association had received a grievance alleging Kerr conspired in wire fraud (18 U.S.C. § 1343) and conspired to retain lease bonuses from SandRidge Energy, Inc., on oil and gas leases with defective title.
- Kerr acknowledged the alleged conduct, if proven, would violate Oklahoma Rules of Professional Conduct (Rules 8.4(b), 8.4(c)) and Rule 1.3 of the Rules Governing Disciplinary Proceedings, and his attorney oath.
- Kerr agreed to comply with post-resignation obligations (Rule 9.1 notifications, surrendering membership card, cooperating to return client files, and reimbursement to the Client’s Security Fund prior to any reinstatement).
- The Bar stated no investigation costs were incurred; the Court approved the resignation, struck Kerr’s name from the Roll, and barred reinstatement applications for five years from the effective date (Oct. 13, 2017).
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether the Court should approve a resignation pending disciplinary proceedings | Bar sought court approval under Rule 8.2 to accept Kerr’s voluntary resignation | Kerr submitted a voluntary, knowing resignation and waived contesting allegations | Court approved the resignation effective Oct. 13, 2017 |
| Whether resignation can be effective on filing date or submission date | Bar relied on precedent permitting effectiveness on filing | Kerr’s conduct treated resignation as effective on filing; resignation executed Oct. 12, filed Oct. 13 | Court deemed resignation effective on filing date (Oct. 13, 2017) per cited authorities |
| Whether Kerr may seek reinstatement before five years | Bar invoked Rule 8.2 limits and precedents requiring a five-year minimum before reinstatement | Kerr acknowledged he may not apply before five years and must satisfy Rule 11 on reinstatement | Court ordered no reinstatement application before five years and conditioned reinstatement on Rule 11 compliance |
| Responsibility for Client’s Security Fund reimbursement | Bar noted Fund may pay client claims and must be repaid prior to reinstatement | Kerr agreed to repay principal and interest expended by the Fund before reinstatement | Court ordered repayment (with interest) to the Fund prior to any reinstatement |
Key Cases Cited
- State ex rel. Oklahoma Bar Ass'n v. Bourland, 19 P.3d 289 (Okla. 2001) (resignation effective rules and standards for resignation approval)
- In re Reinstatement of Hird, 21 P.3d 1043 (Okla. 2001) (reinstatement requirements after disciplinary resignation)
- State ex rel. Oklahoma Bar Association v. Heinen, 84 P.3d 708 (Okla. 2003) (Client’s Security Fund reimbursement requirement prior to reinstatement)
- State ex rel. Oklahoma Bar Ass'n v. Demopolos, 352 P.3d 1210 (Okla. 2015) (timing rules for effective date of resignation)