Legal Opinion
In the Matter of Yalkut
New Mexico Supreme Court
Decided January 23, 2008No. 29,396PublishedCited by 33 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION
2Per curiam
{1} The focus of this disciplinary proceeding is whether the evidence demonstrated that attorney Kent E. Yalkut (Respondent) misappropriated client funds and, as a result, should be disbarred. There is no dispute that Respondent accepted a flat fee from a client and did not deposit it in a trust account as required by the Rules of Professional Conduct. Instead, the flat fee was commingled with other funds in a personal account belonging to Respondent and from which Respondent made several withdrawals. While it is clear from the evidence that Respondent misused his client’s funds, we…
3Cases cited11 opinions
- High Ridge Hinkle Joint Venture v. City of AlbuquerqueNew Mexico Supreme Court · 1998
- Trujillo v. SerranoNew Mexico Supreme Court · 1994
- In Re Robert Matthew BristolNew Mexico Supreme Court · 2006
- Security Pacific Financial Services v. Signfilled Corp.New Mexico Court of Appeals · 1998
- Landskroner v. McClureNew Mexico Supreme Court · 1988
6 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
4Cited by33 opinions
- Potomac Conference Corp. of Seventh-Day Adventists v. Takoma Academy Alumni Ass'nDistrict Court, D. Maryland · 2014
- Sunnyland Farms, Inc. v. Central New Mexico Electric Cooperative, Inc.New Mexico Supreme Court · 2013
- Guest v. Allstate InsuranceNew Mexico Supreme Court · 2010
- Muncey v. Eyeglass World, LLCNew Mexico Court of Appeals · 2012
- AG New Mexico, FCS, ACA v. Borges (In re Borges)United States Bankruptcy Court, D. New Mexico · 2012
28 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.