From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

In re Pyle

Supreme Court of Kansas
Apr 27, 2007
284 Kan. 727 (Kan. 2007)

Summary

holding that attorneys' constitutional free speech rights are "tempered by their obligations to the court and bar"

Summary of this case from Bd. of Prof'l Responsibility v. Parrish

Opinion

No. 96,579.

April 27, 2007.

ORDER OF REINSTATEMENT

ATTORNEY AND CLIENT — Disciplinary Proceeding — Reinstatement of Suspended License.


On April 27, 2007, this court suspended the respondent, E. Thomas Pyle, III, from the practice of law in Kansas for a period of 3 months. See In re Pyle, 283 Kan. 807, 156 P.3d 1231 (2007). Before reinstatement, the respondent was required to pay the costs of the disciplinary action.

The Disciplinary Administrator's office has verified that the respondent has fully complied with the conditions imposed upon him by this court. This court finds that the respondent, E. Thomas Pyle, III, should be reinstated to the practice of law in the state of Kansas.

IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED that the respondent be reinstated to the practice of law in the state of Kansas as of the date of this order.

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that this order of reinstatement shall be published in the official Kansas Reports.

DATED this 27th day of July, 2007.


Summaries of

In re Pyle

Supreme Court of Kansas
Apr 27, 2007
284 Kan. 727 (Kan. 2007)

holding that attorneys' constitutional free speech rights are "tempered by their obligations to the court and bar"

Summary of this case from Bd. of Prof'l Responsibility v. Parrish

holding attorney's criticism of members of disciplinary board was not protected by the First Amendment: "There is a line between just and unjust criticism. Respondent crossed it. This is evident from his plainly selfish motive. He displayed no desire to improve the disciplinary system, only to excuse its focus on him."

Summary of this case from Iowa Disciplinary Board v. Weaver
Case details for

In re Pyle

Case Details

Full title:In the Matter of E. THOMAS PYLE, III, Respondent

Court:Supreme Court of Kansas

Date published: Apr 27, 2007

Citations

284 Kan. 727 (Kan. 2007)
283 Kan. 807
163 P.3d 267

Citing Cases

In re Kline

See O'Brien v. Superior Court, 105 Conn.App. 774, 794 n. 22, 939 A.2d 1223 (2008) (noting some commentators…

In re Jordan

."202. In In re Pyle , 283 Kan. 807, 821, 156 P.3d 1231 (2007), the Supreme Court held that it was required…