Law Commons^™

Solicitation And The Uncertain Status Of The Code Of Professional Responsibility In Kentucky, Eugene R. Gaetke

Law Faculty Scholarly Articles

In 1969 the Kentucky Supreme Court adopted the American Bar Association's Code of Professional Responsibility as the disciplinary rules binding upon attorneys practicing in the state. The Court adopted the Code as an apparent attempt to provide the Kentucky bench and bar the certainty and guidance offered by a codification of the frequently subjective and occasionally nebulous body of law known as legal ethics. The Court used particular language in its rule adopting the Code, however, which renders uncertain the precise status of the Code in Kentucky. As a result, a conscientious practitioner in Kentucky cannot confidently look to the …

Kentucky Law Survey: Professional Responsibility, Eugene R. Gaetke, Rebecca G. Casey

Law Faculty Scholarly Articles

In the face of persistent criticism of the legal profession, from within as well as without, the Kentucky Supreme Court exhibits a certain degree of ambivalence toward issues of professional responsibility. This ambivalence manifests itself in two ways.

First, the Court's treatment of different categories of professional misconduct seems at times unjustifiably inconsistent. The Court reacts to certain misconduct in an almost uniformly harsh manner, evincing the attitude of a strict disciplinarian for the practicing bar. Occasionally, however, the Court responds to various other kinds of equally gross misconduct with apparently undue leniency. In such cases the Court seems to …

Presuming Lawyers Competent To Protect Fundamental Rights: Is It An Affordable Fiction?, Robert G. Lawson

Law Faculty Scholarly Articles

This article explores the ramifications of Wainwright v. Sykes, a case decided before the Supreme Court of the United States in 1977. The broad question before the Court in Sykes concerned the extent to which state prisoners should have access to federal court by use of the writ of habeas corpus. The narrow issue before the Court concerned the impact on a prisoner's claim for habeas relief of procedural defaults (such as a failure to object to evidence, a failure to perfect an appeal, etc.) that occur in the state proceeding under attack. In considering these important issues Justice …