KENTUCKY BAR ASSOCIATION V. RICHARD GRAHAM KENNISTON

Annotate this Case

Download PDF

TO BE PUBLISHED 2018-SC-000069-KB KENTUCKY BAR ASSOCIATION v. MOVANT IN SUPREME COURT RICHARD GRAHAM KENNISTON RESPONDENT OPINION AND ORDER Pursuant to Supreme Court Rule (SCR) 3.380(2), the Kentucky Bar Association (KBA) has moved this Court to suspend Richard Graham Kenniston 1 indefinitely from the practice of law for {ailing to respond to charges initiated by the Inquiry Commission (Commission) of the KBA. Finding sufficient cause to do so, we grant the Commission's motion. KBA File 17-DIS-0054 In August 2016, Kenniston was retained by Bonnie Riddell to represent her in a custody matter involving her grandson. Kenniston received a $1,500 non-refundable retainer for ~he representation. Later, on January-19, 2017, Riddell dismiss~ Kenniston after he failed to appear at a proceeding in family . court. While Kenniston agreed to.refund the unearned retainer by January 24, 1 Kenniston's bar roster address is P . .0. Box 848, Richmond, Kentucky 40476, and his bar roster number is 90572. · · 2017, he ultimately failed to do so. Consequently, Riddell filed a bar complaint against Kenniston on February 6, 2017. After.the bar complaint was filed · agai~st Kenniston, he corresponded· with the Office of Bar Counsel and reiterated to Riddell that he intended to refund the retainer by June 30, 2017. However, Kenniston failed to refund the · retainer. On August 7, 2017, the Commission issued a private admonition with conditions against Kennisto~ for violation of SCR 3.130(1.16)(d) (Declining or terminating representation). As a condition of the private admonition, .Kenniston was obligated to return the re~ainer within s~ty Commission's order .. Kenniston failed to comply with the . . days of the Commis~ion's . directive to return the retainer. Afterwards, on October 20, 2017, private ad~onition. th.~ KBA filed a motion to revoke his Kenniston did not respond to this motion or appear before the Commission ata hearing on November 1, 2017. As a result, the Commission.revoked Kenni~ton's ·private admonition and issued a complaint on November 3, 2017, alleging two violations:-(1) SCR 3.130(1.16)(d) (Declining or terminating representation) for failing to refund the unearned retainer to Riddell and (2) SCR 3.130(3.4)(c) (Fairness to opposing party and counsel) for failing to comply with the conditions set forth .in the Commission's private admonition. KBA File 17-DIS-0131 On November 15, 2016, Vicki_Murphy paid Kenniston $500 to handle the probate proceedings for her father's estate. Kenniston appeared in court in 2 December 12, 2016, and was instructed to file the decedent's original will. Afterwards, Murphy was unable to contact Kenniston as his phone line had been disconnected and his office vacated. Due to her inability to reach Kenniston, Murphy retained new counsel, who filed a motion to continue probate proceedings for her father's estate. Subsequently, Kenniston learned that Murphy had retained new counsel and returned her file. Kenniston admitted to Murphy that he closed his office , iIJ. January 2017 and did not recall {laving contact with her after the December 2016 court appearahce. Further, Kenniston explained to Murphy that he had f~led to file the necessary probate documents because he did not have enough time· to do so. Consequently, Murphy filed a bar complaint against Kenniston on April 20, 2017. Kenniston filed a response to Murphy's bar complaint on June 5, 2017, and responded by email on August 2, 2017, to an additional inquiry from the Office of Bar Counsel. On November 9, 2017, the Commission issued a second complaint against Kenniston alleging the following violations: (1) SCR 3.130(1.3) (Diligence) for failing to perform work for which he had been hired; (2) SCR 3.130(1.4)(a)(3) (Com:munication) for failing to inform Murphy about the status of the probate case; and (3) SCR 3.130(1.16)(d) (Declining or ' terminating representation) .for failing to refund the unearned retainer to Murphy. r 3 KBA File 17-DIS,;.0289 In September 2016, Sherry Kincaid hired Kenniston to represent her in a custody petition involving her cousin. However, Kenniston did not appear at scheduled court dates in Kincaid's case on May 12, 2017 and June 9, 2017, prolonging the proceedings. Also, Kenniston was unresponsive to Kincaid's repeated efforts to reach him by telephone; Kincaid has .not had contact with Kenniston following his failure to appear in court on June 9, 2017. Due to Kenniston's unavailability, Kincaid was compelled to appear in court pro se, where she Sl,lccessfully argued her custody petition. Additionally, Kenniston · failed to reimburse Kincaid for a $40 fee she paid on his behalf to the sheriffs office. Subsequently, on Jl,lly 26, 2017, Kincaid filed a bar complaint. against Kenniston. On September .s, 2017, Kenniston filed a response to the bar complrunt. In late Septeml;>er, Kenni~ton also informed the Office of Bar Counsel that he inte.nded to reimburse Kincaid for the $40 fee in .short order. However, Kenniston failed to reimburse Kincaid for the fee .and had no additional contact with the Office of Bar Counsel. On November 9, 2017, the Commission issued a third complaint against Kenniston alleging the following violations: (1) SCR 3.130(1.3) (Diligence) for failing to appear in court regarding her custody case; (2) SCR 3.130(1.4)(a)(3) (CommuniCation) for failing to communicate with Kincaid regarding the status of her case after failing. to · appear at the June 9, 2017 hearing; and (3) SCR 3.130(1.16)(d) (Declining or 4 terminating representation) .for failing to refund his unearned fee and the sherifrs fee to Kincaid.2 Kenniston was served with the Commission's charges by mail on January 11, 2018 and January 22, 2018. Despite being served, Kenniston ~ailed to. answer the Commission's charges prior ~o the KBA's. filing of the · Motion. for Suspension on February 13, 2018.3 Due to Kenniston's failure to respond timely, the KBA r~quests that this Court indefinitely suspend Kenniston, under SCR 3.380(2). Having rev.iewed the KBA's motion, we agree that indefinite· suspension is warranted. For the foregoing reasons, it is hereby ORDERED: 1. fursuant to SCR 3.380(2),· Richard Graham Kenniston is hereby suspended indefinitely from the practice of law in the C9mmonwealth of Kentucky. 2 Subsequently, the Office of Bar Counsel filed a motion to clarify its complaint against Kenniston to identify that the cJ:i:il.d that Kincaid sought custody of was her ·cousin not her grandchild as previously stated by Kenniston. Kenniston did not file a response to the Office of Bar Counsel's motion and an order amending the complaint was entered January 8, 2018. The Office of Bar Counsel has informed the Court that Kenniston tendered· a one-page response KBA File 17-DIS-O 131 and a similar~y brief response in KBA File 17-DIS-0289 on March 13, 2018. Kenniston tendered-no response in KBA File 17DIS-0054. On April 10; 2018, Kenniston moved for perlnission to file a late answer but failed to include a Certificate of Service (Kentucky Rules of Civil Procedure (CR) 5.03) or to comply with CR 76.34(3), which states.that ten copies of motions and responses shall be filed as required and as the Court directs. On April 17, 2018, the Court granted the KBA's Motion to Supplement the Motion for Suspension, which stated that Kenniston's filings were untimely and did not comply with the Civil Rules. Because of Kenniston's failure to comply with the rules, his belated responses were not considered. However, in any event, the responses would not affect the outcome of this case. 3 m 5 2. As \equired by SCR 3.390, Kenniston will within ten (10) days after the issuance of this order of suspension notify, by letter 1duly placed with tP,e ', United States Postal Service, all courts or other tribunals in which he bas matters pending of his suspension. Further, he will inform, by mail, all of his clients of ])is inability to represent them and of the n~cessity and urgency of j promptly retaining new counsel. Kenniston shall simultaneously provide a copy of all such letters of notification to the Office of Bar Counsel. Kenniston shall 1mmediately cancel any pending advertisements, to the extent possible, and shall terminate any advertising activity for the duration of the term of suspension. 3. As stated. in SCR 3.390(a),- this order shall take effect on the tenth (10th) day following its entry. Kenniston is instructed to take promptly all I reasonable steps to protect the interests of his clients. He shall l)ot during the term of suspension accept new clients or collect unearned fees and shall ( comply with the provisions of SCR 3.130-7.50(5). All sitting. All concur~ ENTERED: June 14, 2018. 6

Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.