New: Find an ethics lawyer

Kentucky Legal Ethics

INTRODUCTION

0.1:100 Sources of Law and Guidance

0.1:101 Professional Codes

The Kentucky Rules of Professional Conduct ("KRPC") were adopted on July 12, 1989, by order of the Kentucky Supreme Court, and became effective January 1, 1990. Order 89-1.  The KRPC are published as Kentucky Supreme Court Rules 3.130(1.1) through SCR 3.130(8.4). A significant change occurred in 1992 when new rules governing advertising were adopted. Order 92-1.  Select provisions of the KRPC have been subsequently amended in 1993, 1994, 1995, 1996, 1997, 1998, 1999, and 2001. The version of the KRPC used in producing this narrative included amendments received through February 1, 2003. The 2003 edition of the ABA Model Rules (adopted February 2002) was used for comparisons between the Model Rules and the KRPC.  The comparisons included in this narrative also examine the Comments adopted by the ABA Model Rules and the KRPC.

The Board of Governors of the Kentucky Bar Association ("KBA"), with the cooperation of the Kentucky Supreme Court, authorized the creation of the Kentucky Ethics 2000 Committee in July 2003 to explore the most recent American Bar Association changes to the ABA Model Rules of Professional Conduct, often referred to as "Ethics 2000." The committee is charged with making recommendations to the Board of Governors for changes to the KRPC based upon the ABA recommendations and current practice. The committee also will consider changes in the KRPC that might be desirable for Kentucky in the light of the passage of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002. The goal of the committee is to review all of the recommended changes from the ABA Ethics 2000 Committee and determine which changes are feasible, workable, and desirable in Kentucky, and to suggest any necessary modifications in the changes to make them effective in Kentucky. The committee expects to issue its report in the Spring of 2005.  The committee is composed of persons with a wide range of legal experience, including civil and criminal practitioners, law professors, present and former judges, a representative from the Supreme Court staff and a member of the KBA disciplinary staff.

0.1:102 "Other" Law and Moral Obligation

In addition to the KRPC, there are numerous Kentucky Supreme Court Rules under Rule 3 that govern the practice of law in Kentucky. These Rules describe, inter alia, the purpose of the KBA, the appointment of the Inquiry Commission and the duties of the KBA Office of Bar Counsel.

Kentucky Supreme Court Rule 3.530 [amended by Order 96-1, eff. 1-1-97] allows for the issuance of informal and formal ethics opinions by the Ethics and Unauthorized Practice Committees of the KBA. [See Bar Organizations, infra, at 0.2:220]. These opinions are advisory only; however, no attorney shall be disciplined for any professional act on his part performed in compliance with an opinion furnished to him on his petition, provided the petition clearly, fairly, accurately and completely states the contemplated professional act. SCR 3.530. The bulk of the ethics opinions written before the effective date of the KRPC grew out of the Kentucky Code of Professional Responsibility. Some opinions written before 1990 are, therefore, obsolete, although the opinions are never withdrawn or overruled. [See Background of the Kentucky Rules of Professional Conduct, infra, at 0.1:103].

0.1:103 Background of the Kentucky Rules of Professional Conduct

One of the first sets of ethical standards for lawyers published in Kentucky was the Kentucky Code of Legal Ethics. Adopted by the Kentucky Bar Association in 1903, this Code was primarily an aspirational, rather than prescriptive, standard. The Kentucky Canons of Professional Ethics, first published in 1908, were incorporated into Kentucky law through Supreme Court Rule 3.170 on May 14, 1946, and governed until 1971.  On July 2, 1971, Kentucky adopted the Code of Professional Responsibility. (Kentucky never adopted the ABA Code of Professional Responsibility, but rather its own "Code;" many erroneously assume the pre-KRPC "Code" was derived directly from the ABA Code. [See Unusual Aspects of the Kentucky Ethics Rules, infra, at 0.1:104])  The Kentucky Code of Professional Responsibility was subsequently replaced by the KRPC when it became effective January 1, 1990. 

0.1:104 Unusual Aspects of the Kentucky Ethics Rules

Perhaps the most unusual aspect of the KRPC is its tailored approach to lawyer advertising under Rule 7.  Rule 7 contains substantially all of MR 7.1 through 7.5 [See Information About Legal Services, infra, at Part VII], but adds detailed provisions dealing with, inter alia, the content of advertisements, the formation of an Attorney&'s Advertising Commission, a procedure for submitting specific advertisements to the Commission for approval, and the Kentucky Disaster Response Plan, which governs lawyer solicitation and behavior in the wake of a natural or manmade disaster.

Another distinction of Kentucky legal ethics regulation is that, because the Kentucky Supreme Court has not adopted MR 8.3, Kentucky lawyers are under no enforceable obligation to report ethical misconduct by other lawyers and there is no enforceable sanction for failing to do so. See, e.g., Parker D. Eastin, Note: Should Kentucky Impose an Enforceable Duty on Lawyers to Report Other Lawyers&' Professional Misconduct? 87 Ky. L.J. 1271 (1998/1999). [See Rule 8.3: Reporting Professional Misconduct, infra, 8.3 et seq.].

The "appearance of impropriety" doctrine gives clients a basis independent of Kentucky&'s Rules of Professional Conduct to test the loyalty of Kentucky attorneys.  The Kentucky Supreme Court specifically endorsed the test in Lovell v. Winchester, Ky., 941 S.W.2d 466, 468-69 (1997), explaining that even though the "formula is vague and leads to uncertain results, it nonetheless serves the useful function of stressing that disqualification properly may be imposed to protect the reasonable expectations of former and present clients."  In Lovell, a lawyer was disqualified from representing the opponent of a person who had earlier come to his office for a consultation on the case.  The lawyer had kept pertinent documents belonging to that person for approximately a month.  Id. at 467.  See also Humco, Inc. v. Noble, Ky., 31 S.W.3d 916 (2000), declining to extend the test to persons other than clients.  [Compare KRPC 1.10, Comment [9], infra, at 1.10:101.]

Further, Kentucky allows "screening" to avoid disqualification where lawyers move from one private firm to another.  Effective February 1, 2000, Kentucky implemented KRPC 1.10(d), providing that "[a] firm is not disqualified from representation of a client if the only basis for disqualification is representation of a former client by a lawyer presently associated with the firm, sufficient to cause that lawyer to be disqualified pursuant to Rule 1.9 and (1) the disqualified lawyer is screened from any participation in the matter and is apportioned no specific part of the fee therefrom; and (2) written notice is given to the former client."  [See Model Rule Comparison, infra, at 1.10:101].

Finally, Kentucky&'s pre-KRPC "Code of Professional Responsibility" was not, as many have assumed, derived directly from the ABA Code of Professional Responsibility.  It had its own unique provisions not contained in the ABA Code. [See Background of the Kentucky Rules of Professional Conduct, supra, at 0.1:103]

0.2:200 Forms of Lawyer Regulation in Kentucky

The Kentucky Supreme Court is empowered to discipline a lawyer who is guilty of professional misconduct.  The Court can: (1) issue a private reprimand against the lawyer; (2) issue a public reprimand against the lawyer; (3) suspend the lawyer&'s license to practice in Kentucky for a period of months or years, with or without conditions; or (4) enter an order of disbarment prohibiting the lawyer from practicing law in Kentucky.  SCR 3.380.

The Kentucky Supreme Court can be reached through the Clerk&'s Office at:

Susan Stokley Clary, Clerk of the Supreme Court

State Capitol

Room 209, 700 Capital Avenue

Frankfort, Kentucky 40601

Phone: (502) 564-5444

Paula Yeast, Chief Deputy

Phone: (502) 564-4720

0.2:210 Judicial Regulation

Kentucky justices and judges are subject to Sections 117 through 124 of the Kentucky Constitution which govern, inter alia, their eligibility for office, election, compensation and removal.

Supreme Court Rule 4.000, et seq., contains the Kentucky Code of Judicial Conduct, SCR 4.300 (which is substantially similar to the ABA Model Code of Judicial Conduct) and provisions establishing the Judicial Conduct Commission (formerly known as the Judicial Retirement and Removal Commission).

The Commission is composed of one judge of the Court of Appeals, selected by that court, one circuit judge and one district judge, selected by a majority vote of the circuit judges and district judges, respectively, one member of the bar appointed by its governing body, and two persons, not members of the bench or bar, appointed by the Governor. The Judicial Conduct Comission is a state body whose members hold office for four-year terms. Its actions are subject to judicial review by the Kentucky Supreme Court. Ky. Const. §121. Pursuant to Ky. Const. §121 and SCR 4.000, et seq., the Judicial Conduct Commission may take three different types of actions with regard to judicial misconduct or unfitness for office: a judge may be (1) retired for disability, (2) suspended without pay, or (3) removed for good cause.

The Judicial Conduct Commission can be reached at:

James D. Lawson, Executive Secretary 

Judicial Conduct Commission

P.O. Box 21868

Lexington, KY 40522-1868

(859) 233-4128

(FAX is the same)

Pursuant to SCR 4.310, an ethics committee of the Kentucky judiciary is authorized to offer informal and formal opinions.  These opinions are only advisory; however, the Judicial Conduct Commission and the Supreme Court will consider reliance by a justice, judge, or trial commissioner upon the ethics committee opinion should an issue arise.

0.2:220 Bar Organizations

The Kentucky Bar Association ("KBA") is empowered, as an agency of the Kentucky Supreme Court, to initiate and supervise investigations of violations of the KRPC and to prosecute charges of professional misconduct. SCR 3.025.  The KBA is governed by a Board of Governors made up of the officers of the KBA and representatives elected by KBA members from each of the seven Kentucky Supreme Court Districts.  Because of the status that the KBA enjoys as an agency of the Court, all lawyers admitted to practice in Kentucky must also be members of the Bar. Thirty-two of the fifty-one State Bar Associations in the United States (including the District of Columbia) are agencies of their respective state's highest court and have compulsory bar membership.

The KBA Board of Governors is empowered to appoint a Bar Counsel and Deputy Bar Counsels. An Inquiry Commission, composed of six lawyers and three non-lawyers appointed by the Chief Justice of the Supreme Court, has the responsibility of reviewing complaints of lawyer misconduct. The Bar Counsel and his or her staff investigate complaints against lawyers and prosecute any charges that may be authorized by the Inquiry Commission. SCR 3.155. [See Disciplinary Agency, infra, 0.2:230]

The KBA also provides guidance to its members through ethics opinions. [See "Other" Law and Moral Obligation, supra, at 0.1:102]. The KBA operates an Ethics Hotline staffed with volunteer attorneys for each Supreme Court District to informally answer questions pertaining to a lawyer&'s contemplated conduct. KBA members may also obtain formal opinions on questions of general interest from the KBA Ethics and Unauthorized Practice Committees by submitting a request in writing to the committee Chair. Formal ethics opinions are published as educational guidance after review and approval by the KBA Board of Governors and the Kentucky Supreme Court. These opinions are advisory only; however, no attorney shall be disciplined for any professional act on his part performed in compliance with an opinion furnished to him on his petition, provided the petition clearly, fairly, accurately and completely states the contemplated professional act. SCR 3.530.

Members of the KBA who reside in any judicial circuit may elect to form a local Bar Association which becomes a division of the KBA with approval of the Board.

The Kentucky Bar Association can be reached at:

Kentucky Bar Association

514 West Main Street

Frankfort, Kentucky 40601-1883

Phone (502)564-3795

Fax (502)564-3225

URL www.kybar.org

Officers:

President

John W. Stevenson

Corporate Centre

Bldg. D, Suite 102

401 Frederica Street

Owensboro, KY 42301

Telephone: 270-688-8500

FAX: 270-688-8550

Email:  jw01stev@bellsouth.net

President-Elect

R. Kent Westberry

Landrum & Shouse

220 West Main Street, Suite 190

Louisville, KY 40202

Telephone: 502-589-7616

FAX:  502-589-7616

Email: kwestberry@landrumshouse.com

Vice President

David B. Sloan

O'Hara, Ruberg, Taylor, Sloan & Sergent

P.O. Box 17411

Covington, KY  41017-0411

Telephone:  859-331-2000

FAX:  859-578-3365

Email:  dsloan@ortlaw.com

Past President

Stephen B. Catron

231 Greenview Way

Bowling Green, KY 42103

Telephone: 270-781-7438

FAX: 270-846-2012

Chair, House of Delegates

Larry H. York

120 North Front Avenue

Prestonsburg, KY  41653-1221

Telephone:  606-886-3876

FAX:  606-886-3876

Chair-Elect

Linda Hopgood

771 Corporate Drive, Suite 610

Lexington, KY 40503

Telephone: 859-223-3422

FAX: 859-223-2940

Chair, Young Lawyers Section

Sheile P. Hiestand

Becker Law Office 

1344 South Broadway

Lexington, KY  40504

Telephone:  859-225-2345

FAX:  859-258-2966

Email:  shiestand@beckerlaw.com

The Office of Bar Counsel can be reached at:

Linda A. Gosnell, Chief Bar Counsel

Jay R. Garrett, Deputy Bar Counsel, Disciplinary Intake Manager

Dana Nickles, Deputy Bar Counsel

Steven T. Pulliam, Deputy Bar Counsel

Cindra Walker, Deputy Bar Counsel

Kentucky Bar Association

514 West Main Street

Frankfort, Kentucky 40601-1883

Telephone:  502-564-3795

FAX: 502-564-3225

Internet: www.kybar.org

The Kentucky Ethics Hotline Committee can be reached at:

0.2:230 Disciplinary Agency

The Inquiry Commission is independent of the Office of Bar Counsel [See Bar Organizations, supra, 0.2:220]; members are appointed by the Kentucky Supreme Court to receive and process, from any source, complaints which allege professional misconduct by lawyers. The Inquiry Commission consists of nine persons, six of whom are lawyers qualified to be a Kentucky Circuit Judge and three of whom are non-lawyer Kentucky citizens at least 30 years old.  The Inquiry Commission meets and acts in panels of three (two lawyers and one non-lawyer) to dispose of complaints referred to it.  SCR 3.140.

If an attorney charged by the Inquiry Commission with the commission of an act of misconduct disputes the account of what transpired, a Trial Commissioner will be appointed from the Trial Commission to conduct a confidential evidentiary hearing. SCR 3.210; SCR 3.225; SCR 3.230; and SCR 3.240.

0.2:240 Disciplinary Process

The disciplinary process begins with a complaint or report of possible misconduct by a Kentucky lawyer:

1. Initial review and investigation: First, a staff attorney in the Office of Bar Counsel will review the complaint to determine whether the facts alleged, if proven, could constitute a case of professional misconduct. [See Bar Organizations, supra, 0.2:220] If the complaint does not present a case of professional misconduct, it will be returned to the complainant or, if the KBA can help in another way, the complaint may be referred to another office of the KBA. If the complaint does provide facts that may constitute professional misconduct, it will be assigned to a staff attorney in the Office of Bar Counsel investigation and forwarded to the lawyer involved for a response.

2. Review by Inquiry Commission: After the Office of Bar Counsel investigation is complete the case is reviewed by members of the Inquiry Commission, who are independent of the Office of Bar Counsel. SCR 3.170. [See Disciplinary Agency, supra, 0.2:230] An Inquiry Commission panel of three people (two lawyers and one non-lawyer) reviews the case regardless of the outcome of the Bar Counsel investigation. The Inquiry Commission is appointed by the Supreme Court to serve as a "grand jury" in disciplinary cases. It reviews the entire record of each complaint investigated by the Office of Bar Counsel. Based on this review, it will decide: (1) whether there is probable cause to believe that the lawyer is guilty of misconduct, and (2) if so, whether the violation is serious enough to justify a formal disciplinary charge. SCR 3.190.

If the Inquiry Commission decides that a charge is not appropriate, it may dismiss the complaint, require additional investigation, or issue a private admonition to the attorney.  Authority to issue private admonitions is vested in the Inquiry Commission by SCR 3.185.

3. Hearing by Trial Commissioner: If a charge is issued but the lawyer disputes the facts supporting the charge, a Trial Commissioner may be appointed and an evidentiary hearing held. An attorney from the Office of Bar Counsel presents evidence in support of the charge, and may ask the complainant to appear as a witness. The hearing is conducted by the Trial Commissioner, who reviews the evidence and renders a report with recommendations on how the case should be decided.

4. Appeal to Board of Governors: If the Office of Bar Counsel or the respondent is not satisfied with the Trial Commissioner&'s recommendation, either may appeal the case to the Board of Governors of the KBA. The case is then presented to the Board of Governors through written briefs and oral arguments.

5. Entry of Final Order by Supreme Court: After the case has passed through all of the necessary steps, the Supreme Court will issue an official order stating the terms of discipline, if any. 

(Adapted from information provided by the Office of Bar Counsel with the permission of its author, former Bar Counsel Benjamin Cowgill, Jr.)

0.2:245 Mandatory Disbarment Upon Conviction of a Crime Involving Moral Turpitude

Any member of the Kentucky Bar Association who pleads guilty or is convicted by a judge or jury of a felony will automatically be suspended from the practice of law.  SCR 3.166; SCR 3.320. Crimes of moral turpitude are considered under Kentucky misconduct law. Kentucky law provides that many kinds of illegal conduct reflect adversely on fitness to practice law, such as offenses involving fraud and the offense of willful failure to file an income tax return. However, some kinds of offense carry no such implication. Traditionally, the distinction was drawn in terms of offenses involving "moral turpitude." That concept can be construed to include offenses concerning some matters of personal morality, such as adultery and comparable offenses, that have no specific connection to fitness for the practice of law. Although a lawyer is personally answerable to the entire criminal law, a lawyer should be professionally answerable only for offenses that indicate lack of those characteristics relevant to law practice. Offenses involving violence, dishonesty, breach of trust, or serious interference with the administration of justice are in that category. A pattern of repeated offenses, even ones of minor significance when considered separately, can indicate indifference to legal obligation. SCR 3.130(8.3) Comment [1].

0.2:250 Sanctions in Judicial Proceedings

If a lawyer is charged with unethical conduct and there is any factual dispute to resolve, the case is referred to a Trial Commissioner for an evidentiary hearing. The Trial Commissioner issues an advisory report containing findings of fact, conclusions of law and the recommended sanction, if any. If no appeal is taken from the Trial Commissioner's report, the case goes directly to the Supreme Court of Kentucky for the entry of an order consistent with the Trial Commissioner's recommendation. If an appeal is taken, the case is submitted to the Board of Governors of the Kentucky Bar Association, which includes four non-lawyers when it hears disciplinary cases. After receiving briefs and hearing oral arguments, the Board will consider the case in closed session and issue an advisory decision, after which the case will proceed to the Supreme Court. The Supreme Court makes the ultimate determination of all charges. [See Disciplinary Process, supra, 0.2:240] The Kentucky Supreme Court has sole right to admit and discipline attorneys, which authority supercedes any inherent power of the circuit court. Kentucky Bar Ass&'n v. Shewmaker, 842 S.W.2d 520 (Ky. 1992).

0.2:260 Criminal and Civil Liability

As stated in SCR 8.3, Comment [1], a lawyer in Kentucky is personally answerable to the entire criminal law but professionally answerable only for offenses that indicate lack of those characteristics relevant to the practice of law. Such offenses include those that involve violence, dishonesty, breach of trust, or serious interference with the administration of justice. A pattern of repeated offenses, even ones of minor significance when considered separately, can indicate indifference to legal obligation.  Conduct giving rise to a guilty plea to charges of official misconduct and criminal charges violates the rule prohibiting a lawyer from committing a criminal act that reflects adversely on that lawyer&'s honesty, trustworthiness, and fitness as a lawyer. Warren v. Kentucky Bar Ass&'n, 870 S.W.2d 219 (Ky. 1994).  KRS 21A.300 imposes criminal sanctions on practicing attorneys who solicit accident or disaster victims by direct mail within thirty days of the event. This statute has been upheld by the Kentucky Supreme Court, Chambers v. Stengel, 37 S.W.3d 741 (Ky. 2001), and by the Sixth Circuit, Chambers v. Stengel, 256 F.3d 397 (6^th Cir. 2001).

  Although Kentucky did not specifically adopt the Preamble and Scope of Model Rules of Professional Conduct, Kentucky abides by the assertion that violation of a Rule does not in itself give rise to a civil cause of action, nor should it create any presumption in such a case that a legal duty has been breached. Evidence of violation of a Rule is admissible in a civil malpractice proceeding against an attorney. In a legal malpractice claim, the plaintiff must prove not only that the defendant attorney malpracticed, but also that the plaintiff would have recovered in the action for which the attorney was originally employed but for the malpractice. Marrs v. Kelly, 95 S.W.3d 856 (Ky. 2003).

0.2:270 Federal Courts and Agencies

Two federal district courts sit in Kentucky, the United States District Court for the Western District of Kentucky, which holds court in Louisville and has divisions in Bowling Green, Owensboro, and Paducah; and the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Kentucky, which holds court in Lexington and has divisions in Ashland, Covington, Frankfort, London and Pikeville. Kentucky is part of the 6^th Circuit Court of Appeals, which sits in Cincinnati, Ohio.

0.2:280 Ethics Rules Applied in Federal Courts in Kentucky

Under local rules of the United States District Court for the Eastern and Western Districts of Kentucky, standards of professional responsibility adopted by the Supreme Court of Kentucky are implicitly deemed to be persuasive authority, if not governing standards, for practice before those district courts. Rule 83.3, Joint Local Rules for Civil Practice for the U.S. Districts Courts of the Eastern and Western Districts of Kentucky, Attorney Discipline, sections (a)(2), (c); Carlsen v. Thomas, 159 F.R.D. 661 (E.D.Ky. 1994).  If it appears to the District Court that an attorney practicing before the Court has violated the rules of the Kentucky Supreme Court governing professional conduct or is guilty of other conduct unbecoming an officer of the Court, any judge may order an attorney to show cause -- within a specified time -- why the Court should not discipline the attorney. Upon the expiration of the period specified or upon the attorney's response to the show cause order, the Court will enter an appropriate order. If requested by the responding attorney, the Court will conduct a hearing prior to determining the appropriate order. Rule 83.3(c).

0.3:300 Organization of This Library and the Model Rules

This Narrative utilizes the Outline for State Narratives prepared for the American Legal Ethics Library. That Outline in turn relies heavily on the organization of the Model Rules of Professional Conduct, which is essentially as follows:

Client-Lawyer Relationship:	Rules SCR 3.130(1.1)-SCR 3.130(1.16)
Counselor:	Rules SCR 3.130(2.1)-SCR 3.130(2.3)
Advocate:	Rules SCR 3.130(3.1)-SCR 3.130(3.9)
Transactions with Persons Other Than Clients:	Rules SCR 3.130(4.1)-SCR 3.130(4.4)
Law Firms and Associations:	Rules SCR 3.130(5.1)-SCR 3.130(5.6)
Public Service:	Rules SCR 3.130(6.1)-SCR 3.130(6.4)
Information About Legal Services:	Rules SCR 3.130(7.01)-SCR 3.130(7.60)
Maintaining the Integrity of the Profession:	Rules SCR 3.130(8.1)-SCR 3.130(8.4)

0.4:400 Abbreviations, References and Terminology

The following abbreviations are generally used throughout this Narrative:

The American Bar Association is referred to as "ABA."

The Kentucky Bar Association is referred to as "KBA."

The ABA Model Rules of Professional Conduct are referred to as "MR."

Individual provisions of the Kentucky Rules of Professional Conduct are referred to as "KRPC [No.]."

Other provisions of the Supreme Court Rules are cited as "SCR."

Disciplinary Rules under the former Code of Professional Responsibility are cited as "DR," while Ethical Considerations uner the former Code of Professional Responsibility are cited as "EC."

Published Ethics Opinions of the KBA are cited as "KBA E-[No.]."

Unauthorized Practice Opinions of the KBA are cited as "KBA U-[No.]."

The Kentucky Rules of Evidence are cited as "KRE."

The Inquiry Commission is referred to as "the Commission."

The Judicial Retirement and Removal Commission is referred to as "the Judicial Commission."

The American Bar Association Bureau of National Affairs, Inc., the publisher of the ABA Model Rules, is cited as "ABA/BNA."

The American Law Institute&'s Restatement of the Law Third: The Law Governing Lawyers is cited as "ALI-LGL."

Charles Wolfram&'s book, Modern Legal Ethics (St. Paul: West, 1986), is cited as "Wolfram."

0.4:410 "Belief" or "Believes"

"Belief" or "believes" denotes that the person involved actually supposed the fact in question to be true. A person&'s belief may be inferred from circumstances.

0.4:420 "Consult" or "Consultation"

"Consult" or "consultation" denotes communication of information reasonably sufficient to permit the client to appreciate the significance of the matter in question.

0.4:430 "Firm" or "Law Firm"

"Firm" or "law firm" denotes a lawyer or lawyers in a private firm, lawyers employed in the legal department of a corporation or other organization and lawyers employed in a legal services organization.

0.4:440 "Fraud" or "Fraudulent"

"Fraud" or "fraudulent" denotes conduct having a purpose to deceive and not merely negligent misrepresentation or failure to apprise another of relevant information.

0.4:450 "Knowingly," "Known," or "Knows"

"Knowingly," "known," or "knows" denotes actual knowledge of the fact in question. A person&'s knowledge may be inferred from circumstances.

0.4:460 "Partner"

"Partner" denotes a member of a partnership and a shareholder in a law firm organized as a professional corporation.

0.4:470 "Reasonable" or "Reasonably"

"Reasonable" or "reasonably" when used in relation to conduct by a lawyer denotes the conduct of a reasonably prudent and competent lawyer.

0.4:480 "Reasonable belief" or "Reasonably believes"

"Reasonable belief" or "reasonably believes" when used in reference to a lawyer denotes that the lawyer believes the matter in question and that the circumstances are such that the belief is reasonable.

0.4:490 "Substantial"

"Substantial" when used in reference to degree or extent denotes a material matter of clear and weighty importance.

0.4:500 Additional Definitions in Kentucky

"Reasonably should know" when used in reference to a lawyer denotes that a lawyer of reasonable prudence and competence would ascertain the matter in question.