STATE ex rel. OKLAHOMA BAR ASSOCIATION v. KUTNER, 2022 OK 18

Sanford A. Kutner, Oklahoma-licensed attorney since 1970, resides in Louisiana; Oklahoma bar membership in good standing.
In 2012 Kutner (using his wife’s name on a contingency agreement) accepted about $3,700 from a Louisiana client (Jones) to pursue civil-rights litigation; a federal case was filed but later dismissed for failure to serve defendants and Kutner ceased communicating with the client.
Louisiana disciplinary proceedings (initiated in 2017) resulted in a joint petition in which Kutner acknowledged unauthorized practice, neglect, failure to communicate, and failure to return unearned fees; the Louisiana Supreme Court imposed an 18-month prohibition on his practicing or seeking admission in Louisiana (Apr. 20, 2021).
Kutner did not notify the Oklahoma Bar Association within 20 days as required by Rule 7.7; he did not file a written response with the Oklahoma Supreme Court (but sent a letter to the OBA disputing process and citing health/COVID concerns).
The Oklahoma Supreme Court treated the certified Louisiana decision as prima facie evidence, found reciprocal misconduct under Oklahoma rules, suspended Kutner from practicing in Oklahoma for 18 months (retroactive to Apr. 20, 2021), and assessed costs ($15.05).

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether Kutner’s failure to notify the OBA of out-of-state discipline violated RGDP Rule 7.7	OBA: Kutner failed to notify the OBA within 20 days; failure to report is itself disciplinable	Kutner: did not contest failure directly in OK proceeding; cited age, poor health, COVID, and asserted long clean record	Court held failure to notify violated Rule 7.7 and is a ground for discipline
Whether the Louisiana findings constitute professional misconduct in Oklahoma (unauthorized practice, neglect, failure to communicate, failure to return fees)	OBA: Certified Louisiana decision is prima facie evidence and the conduct violates ORPC Rules 5.5, 1.3, 1.4, 1.16	Kutner: in letter to OBA he challenged the substantive findings and process, calling the decision "baseless," though he had agreed to the joint petition in Louisiana	Court held the Louisiana record established misconduct under Oklahoma rules (unauthorized practice and client neglect/communication/fee violations)
Appropriate reciprocal discipline in Oklahoma	OBA: Seek 18-month suspension (same as LA)	Kutner: emphasized decades-long clean Oklahoma record and lack of current clients; urged against further discipline	Court imposed an 18-month suspension beginning Apr. 20, 2021, giving due weight to Louisiana sanction; assessed costs

State ex rel. Oklahoma Bar Ass'n v. Wintory, 350 P.3d 131 (Okla. 2015) (Court’s supervisory role over attorney licensure and discipline)
State ex rel. Oklahoma Bar Ass'n v. Bellamy, 273 P.3d 56 (Okla. 2012) (primary purpose of discipline is public protection and Bar purification)
State ex rel. Oklahoma Bar Ass'n v. Auer, 376 P.3d 243 (Okla. 2016) (out-of-state discipline does not preclude Oklahoma action; reciprocal discipline principles)
State ex rel. Oklahoma Bar Ass'n v. Kleinsmith, 297 P.3d 1248 (Okla. 2013) (give due weight to other jurisdiction’s sanction in reciprocal proceedings)
State ex rel. Oklahoma Bar Ass'n v. Hyde, 397 P.3d 1286 (Okla. 2017) (consider severity of out-of-state sanction and reporting when determining Oklahoma discipline)
State ex rel. Oklahoma Bar Ass'n v. Benefield, 125 P.3d 1191 (Okla. 2005) (one-year suspension for neglect and communication failures across multiple clients)
State ex rel. Oklahoma Bar Ass'n v. Green, 465 P.3d 1197 (Okla. 2020) (ninety-day suspension for neglect of a single matter with mitigating personal factors)
State ex rel. Oklahoma Bar Ass'n v. Combs, 175 P.3d 340 (Okla. 2007) (mitigating weight given to long clean record and remorse)