The Kansas Supreme Court has ordered the reinstatement of attorney Robert A. Mintz's law license, ending a 10-year suspension that began in February 2014. The court issued its Order of Reinstatement in Case No. 110,111 after accepting the recommendations of a disciplinary hearing panel.
Mintz's Kansas law license was indefinitely suspended on Feb. 7, 2014, under Supreme Court Rule 225(a). The original suspension order required Mintz to undergo a reinstatement hearing pursuant to Supreme Court Rule 232(e) before the court would consider any petition for reinstatement. The suspension was referenced in the court's 2014 decision *In re Mintz*, 298 Kan. 897, 317 P.3d 756.
After nearly nine years of suspension, Mintz filed a petition for reinstatement on May 22, 2023, under Rule 232(b). The Kansas Supreme Court found that sufficient time had passed for reconsideration of the suspension and remanded the matter for further investigation by the Office of the Disciplinary Administrator and a reinstatement hearing.
On Sept. 17, 2024, a hearing panel of the Kansas Board for Discipline of Attorneys conducted a formal hearing on Mintz's petition for reinstatement. The panel subsequently issued a Reinstatement Final Hearing Report to the court detailing its findings and recommendations.
In the report, the hearing panel concluded that Mintz presented clear and convincing evidence demonstrating that the factors outlined in Rule 232(e)(4) weigh in favor of reinstatement. Rule 232(e)(4) sets forth the standards that must be met for an attorney to regain their license following disciplinary suspension. The panel recommended that the court grant Mintz's petition and reinstate his law license.
The Kansas Supreme Court accepted and adopted the findings and recommendations of the hearing panel in their entirety. The court granted Mintz's petition for reinstatement and officially reinstated his Kansas law license.
As a condition of reinstatement, the court ordered Mintz to satisfy all administrative requirements. These requirements include payment of all attorney registration fees to the Office of Judicial Administration and completion of all continuing legal education requirements. The court specifically referenced Supreme Court Rule 812, which outlines CLE requirements following reinstatement.
The reinstatement process for suspended attorneys in Kansas involves multiple steps designed to ensure fitness to practice law. After filing a petition for reinstatement, the matter is typically investigated by the Office of the Disciplinary Administrator. A hearing panel then conducts a formal proceeding where the petitioning attorney must demonstrate by clear and convincing evidence that they meet the standards for reinstatement.
The Kansas Board for Discipline of Attorneys operates under the supervision of the Kansas Supreme Court and is responsible for investigating attorney misconduct and conducting disciplinary proceedings. The board's hearing panels are composed of both attorneys and public members who evaluate evidence and make recommendations to the court.
Rule 232(e)(4) requires attorneys seeking reinstatement to demonstrate several factors, including rehabilitation, current fitness to practice law, understanding of the misconduct that led to suspension, and compliance with the terms of the disciplinary order. The clear and convincingevidence standard is a high burden of proof that requires the evidence to be substantially more likely to be true than not true.
Mintz's successful reinstatement follows a comprehensive review process that lasted over a year from his initial petition filing in May 2023 to the final order. The 10-year suspension period represents a significant disciplinary action, and the successful reinstatement indicates the hearing panel found compelling evidence of rehabilitation and fitness to return to practice.
The reinstatement does not automatically restore all privileges associated with law practice. Mintz must complete the administrative requirements, including continuing legal education, before fully resuming practice. The Office of Judicial Administration will oversee compliance with registration fee payments and other administrative matters.
The case demonstrates Kansas's structured approach to attorney discipline and reinstatement, balancing public protection with opportunities for rehabilitation. The requirement for a formal hearing and clear and convincing evidence ensures that only attorneys who have demonstrated genuine rehabilitation and current fitness are permitted to return to practice.
Attorney discipline and reinstatement proceedings serve multiple purposes within the legal profession, including protecting the public, maintaining the integrity of the legal system, and providing opportunities for professional rehabilitation when appropriate. The Kansas Supreme Court's acceptance of the hearing panel's recommendations reflects confidence in the thoroughness of the review process and Mintz's demonstrated fitness to resume practice.