You are viewing a free summary from Descrybe.ai. For citation and good law / bad law checking, legal issue analysis, and other advanced tools, explore our Legal Research Toolkit — not free, but close.

Louisiana State Bar Ass'n v. Kilgarlin

Citations: 561 So. 2d 1377; 1990 La. LEXIS 1373; 1990 WL 73071Docket: No. 89-B-0842

Court: Supreme Court of Louisiana; June 4, 1990; Louisiana; State Supreme Court

EnglishEspañolSimplified EnglishEspañol Fácil
Ronald J. Kilgarlin, an attorney, faces disbarment from the Louisiana State Bar Association due to serious misconduct involving the misappropriation of client funds. Previously suspended for two years for similar offenses, Kilgarlin represented Stephen R. Byer in a worker's compensation case. After co-counsel William Cox negotiated a settlement, Kilgarlin was responsible for finalizing it.

In April 1988, Kilgarlin deposited a $15,000 check from Zurich Insurance Company into an IOLTA account but subsequently wrote checks depleting the account for personal expenses, totaling over $7,580.38 in converted funds, while the statutory fee was only $2,500. Client Byer received partial restitution only after the account was frozen due to Cox's intervention, and Kilgarlin delayed restitution until just before the Supreme Court hearing.

Kilgarlin admitted to his misconduct in a brief submitted to the court, citing personal difficulties as a mitigating factor but ultimately demonstrating a pattern of dishonesty and indifference to his client's needs. The Committee on Professional Responsibility recommended disbarment, which was supported by the Chief Disciplinary Counsel, emphasizing that Kilgarlin's actions caused significant harm to Byer, an injured worker. The aggravating factors in Kilgarlin's case outweigh any mitigating circumstances, leading to the conclusion that disbarment is warranted.

The court formally ordered Kilgarlin's disbarment, with all costs of the proceedings assessed against him. Additionally, allegations from Kilgarlin regarding theft of checks were dismissed due to inconsistencies. The decision aligns with ABA standards for lawyer sanctions, specifically where a lawyer knowingly converts client property, causing potential harm.