Legal Opinion

Chambers v. Stengel

Kentucky Supreme Court

Decided February 22, 2001No. 2000-SC-0062-CLPublishedCited by 3 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

GRAVES, Justice.

The Kentucky Constitution provides that the Supreme Court has the sole authority to regulate and discipline “members of the bar.” see Ky. Const. § 116. However, the Kentucky Constitution does not give the Supreme Court the power to criminalize lawyer conduct. We certify that the Kentucky General Assembly did *742not violate separation-of-powers principles by enacting KRS §§ 21A.300 and 21A.310(1), which impose criminal sanctions on practicing attorneys who solicit accident or disaster victims by direct mail within 30 days of the event.

This case comes to this Court on a request for…

2Cases cited16 opinions

  1. Commonwealth v. ReneerKentucky Supreme Court · 1987
  2. People Ex Rel. Chicago Bar Ass'n v. GoodmanIllinois Supreme Court · 1937
  3. R.I. Bar Asso. v. Auto. Service Asso.Supreme Court of Rhode Island · 1935
  4. Drumm v. CommonwealthKentucky Supreme Court · 1990
  5. Ex Parte Auditor of Public AccountsKentucky Supreme Court · 1980

11 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by3 opinions

  1. Chambers v. StengelCourt of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 2001
  2. James W. Chambers v. David Stengel, in His Capacity as Jefferson County Commonwealth Attorney Michael Conliffe, in His Official Capacity as Jefferson County Attorney, A.B. Chandler, Iii, IntervenorCourt of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 2001
  3. Chambers v. StengelKentucky Supreme Court · 2001

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API