The Bench & Bar magazine is published to provide members of the KBA with information that will increase their knowledge of the law, improve the practice of law, and assist in improving the quality of legal services for the citizenry.
Issue link: https://kentuckybenchandbar.epubxp.com/i/450788
29 B&B; • 1.15 vided separately from a proposed order pertaining to any o ther matter. F. Subparagraph (a) of LCrR 57.2 – Permission to Practice in a Particular Case – will be amended as follows: (a) Procedure. An attorney who has not been admitted to the Bar of the Court – but who is in good standing in the Bar of any state, territory, or the District of Columbia – may represent parties before the Court if the attorney has paid the prescribed pro hac vice admission fee to the Clerk of the Court and been granted leave by the Court to appear pro hac vice in a particular case. A separate mo - tion for each attorney requesting pro hac vice admission must include the following information may request per - mission to practice in a particular case by filing the follow - ing with the Clerk : (1) a separate motion for admission pro hac vice for each attorney Admission Status. The motion must identify each Bar in which the attorney is a member and attach a certificate of good standing issued by the highest court of the state, territory, or the Dis - trict of Columbia in which the attorney is a resident. The certificate of good standing must be issued no more than ninety (90) days before the filing of the motion. (2) an affidavit identifying the Bar in which the attorney is a member in good standing; Disciplinary History. The motion must disclose whether the attorney is c urrently or has ever been disbarred, suspended from practice, or subject to other disciplinary action by any court, state, territory, or the District of Co - l umbia. (3) the prescribed fee; and Consent to Jurisdiction . The motion must include a statement indicating that the attorney consents to be subject to the jurisdiction and rules of the Kentucky Supreme Court govern - ing professional conduct. (4) a written consent to be subject to the jurisdiction and rules of the Kentucky Supreme Court govern - ing professional conduct; and ECF Training . The motion must identify the method of training com - pleted by the attorney before use of the Court's electronic filing system. (5) a statement identifying the method of training com - pleted before use of the Court's electronic filing sys - tem. * * * * * Comments concerning the proposed rule amendments are wel- come. Comments must be submitted in writing or via email on or before February 28, 2015 and should be sent to: Brian F. Haara, Chair, Joint Local Rules Commission, Tachau Meek PLC, 101 South Fifth Street, Suite 3600, Louisville, Kentucky 40202 bhaara@tachaulaw.com COMMONWEALTH OF KENTUCKY JUDICIAL CONDUCT COMMISSION ORDER OF PRIVATE REPRIMAND The Commission issues this order of private reprimand to a judge for violation of the Code of Judicial Conduct, SCR 4.300, Canons 2D, 4A(1) and 5A(1)(c). The judge "liked" the Facebook pages of some lawyers and of a candidate for judicial office. By "liking" the Facebook page of the lawyers, the judge violated Canon 2D's prohibition against conveying the impression that others are in a special position to influence the judge. By "lik- ing" the Facebook page of the candidate, the judge violated Canon 5A(1)(c) which prohibits a judge from publicly endorsing a candidate for public office. The judge also posted on Facebook offensive comments concerning a lawyer who practiced in the judge's court. By these public comments, the judge violated 4A(1) by engaging in extra-judicial activities which cast reasonable doubt on the judge's capacity to act impartially as a judge. The judge informed the Commission that the public "likes" of the Facebook pages in question were inadvertent because of the judge's lack of familiarity with Facebook. The judge also informed the Commission that the comments about the lawyer were immediately regretted and removed, and assured the Commission that the judge would recuse from any case involving the lawyer, if requested. However, all judges must be sensitive that when they participate on social media, they violate the Code of Judicial Conduct if their actions are inappropriate for judges. Therefore, for the foregoing conduct the judge is hereby privately reprimanded. In issuing this private reprimand, the Commission duly considered that the judge fully cooperated in the investigation and had no prior infractions. Date: December 5, 2014 /s/ Stephen D. Wolnitzek, Chair