10.05.2014 Views

P:\CLEPUB\Books\Disciplinary Board Reporter ... - Oregon State Bar

P:\CLEPUB\Books\Disciplinary Board Reporter ... - Oregon State Bar

P:\CLEPUB\Books\Disciplinary Board Reporter ... - Oregon State Bar

SHOW MORE
SHOW LESS

Create successful ePaper yourself

Turn your PDF publications into a flip-book with our unique Google optimized e-Paper software.

Cite as In re Hendrick, 19 DB Rptr 170 (2005)<br />

STIPULATION FOR DISCIPLINE)<br />

R. Kevin Hendrick, attorney at law (hereinafter “the Accused”), and the<br />

<strong>Oregon</strong> <strong>State</strong> <strong>Bar</strong> (hereinafter “the <strong>Bar</strong>”) hereby stipulate to the following matters<br />

pursuant to <strong>Oregon</strong> <strong>State</strong> <strong>Bar</strong> Rule of Procedure 3.6(c).<br />

1.<br />

The <strong>Bar</strong> was created and exists by virtue of the laws of the <strong>State</strong> of <strong>Oregon</strong><br />

and is, and at all times mentioned herein was, authorized to carry out the provisions<br />

of ORS Chapter 9, relating to the discipline of lawyers.<br />

2.<br />

The Accused, R. Kevin Hendrick, was admitted by the <strong>Oregon</strong> Supreme Court<br />

to the practice of law in <strong>Oregon</strong> on April 26, 1991, and has been a member of the<br />

<strong>Oregon</strong> <strong>State</strong> <strong>Bar</strong> continuously since that time, having his office and place of<br />

business in Marion County, <strong>Oregon</strong>.<br />

3.<br />

The Accused enters into this Stipulation for Discipline freely, voluntarily, and<br />

with the advice of counsel. This Stipulation for Discipline is made under the<br />

restrictions of <strong>Bar</strong> Rule of Procedure 3.6(h).<br />

4.<br />

The <strong>State</strong> Professional Responsibility <strong>Board</strong> (hereinafter “SPRB”) authorized<br />

a formal disciplinary proceeding against the Accused for violation of DR 5-103(B)<br />

and DR 5-108(B), Case No. 03-96, on October 10, 2003. On December 12, 2003, the<br />

SPRB authorized a formal disciplinary proceeding against the Accused in Case No.<br />

03-127 for violation of DR 1-102(A)(3), DR 1-102(A)(4), and DR 1-103(C); and<br />

Case No. 03-128 for violation of DR 5-101(A). On April 8, 2005, the SPRB further<br />

considered the matters and directed that the Accused be charged with violation of DR<br />

6-101(A) in Case No. 03-128, and the disposition of other charges. The parties intend<br />

that this stipulation set forth all relevant facts, violations, and the agreed-upon<br />

sanction as a final disposition of this proceeding.<br />

Facts and Violations<br />

VanCleve Matter<br />

(Case No. 03-096)<br />

5.<br />

Prior to January 2002, Sunset Village Mobile Home Park (hereinafter “Sunset<br />

Village”) filed a complaint for forcible entry and detainer against a tenant, Beverly<br />

VanCleve (hereinafter VanCleve”), related to a manufactured home rental space. By<br />

agreement, VanCleve vacated the premises and the FED action was dismissed.<br />

171

Hooray! Your file is uploaded and ready to be published.

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!