The Kentucky Supreme Court has approved a negotiated disciplinary sanction for Lexington attorney Daniel Louis Thompson, imposing a 180-day suspension from the practice of law that will be probated for two years with conditions. The sanction resolves two pending disciplinary proceedings against Thompson stemming from his handling of a criminal case in Madison Circuit Court.
The disciplinary action, detailed in case 2025-SC-0423-KB, arose from Thompson's representation of a client in a criminal matter scheduled for trial on April 29, 2024. According to court documents, Thompson failed to meet several critical professional obligations leading up to the trial date.
The most serious allegations center on Thompson's failure to file proposed jury instructions prior to trial as ordered by the Madison Circuit Court. Thompson also did not respond to communications from the court's staff and failed to meet with his client between the last pre-trial hearing and the scheduled trial date. Additionally, Thompson could not be contacted by a witness attempting to reach him before trial.
On the day of trial, Thompson did not appear in court, though this absence was attributed to a medical condition. The Office of Bar Counsel acknowledged that Thompson's failure to appear was due to legitimate medical reasons and not a violation of professional conduct rules.
On July 10, 2024, the Kentucky Bar Association's Inquiry Commission filed a six-count charge against Thompson. The charges included violations of Kentucky Supreme Court Rule 3.130(1.1), which requires lawyers to provide competent representation to clients, and Rule 3.130(1.3), which mandates that lawyers act with reasonable diligence and promptness in representing clients.
Thompson acknowledged violating the competent representation rule by failing to adequately prepare for the criminal trial. Specifically, he admitted to not speaking with the witness who attempted to contact him prior to trial and failing to meet with his client to prepare for the proceedings. These failures demonstrated a lack of the preparation and attention required for effective legal representation.
Regarding the diligence and promptness rule, Thompson acknowledged violating this standard by failing to file the court-ordered jury instructions. However, he disputed that his failure to appear for trial constituted a violation of this rule, citing his medical condition as the cause of his absence. The Office of Bar Counsel agreed with Thompson's position on this point.
The negotiated sanction was proposed under Kentucky Supreme Court Rule 3.480(2), which allows attorneys to resolve disciplinary proceedings through agreed-upon sanctions. Thompson proposed the 180-day suspension to be probated for two years with conditions, meaning he will not actually be suspended from practice unless he violates the terms of his probation during the two-year period.
The Office of Bar Counsel, which prosecutes attorney disciplinary cases in Kentucky, indicated it had no objection to the proposed sanction. After reviewing the negotiated agreement and the underlying conduct, the Kentucky Supreme Court concluded that the proposed sanction was adequate to address Thompson's professional misconduct.
Thompson, who holds Kentucky Bar Association member number 90712, was admitted to practice law in Kentucky on May 2, 2005. His bar roster address is listed as 207 East Reynolds Road, Suite 230, in Lexington, Kentucky.
The case illustrates the importance of fundamental professional obligations that attorneys owe to their clients and the courts. Filing required documents on time, maintaining communication with clients and courts, and adequately preparing for proceedings are basic requirements of legal practice that, when neglected, can result in disciplinary action.
The probated suspension allows Thompson to continue practicing law while serving as a deterrent against future professional misconduct. The conditions attached to the probation will likely include requirements for continuing legal education, supervision, or other measures designed to ensure Thompson's compliance with professional standards going forward.
This disciplinary action reflects the legal profession's commitment to maintaining standards of competence and diligence in client representation. While the specific details of the second disciplinary proceeding mentioned in the court's opinion were not fully detailed in the available documentation, the negotiated resolution addresses both matters comprehensively.
The Kentucky Supreme Court's approval of the negotiated sanction demonstrates the effectiveness of alternative dispute resolution in professional disciplinary contexts, allowing for proportionate consequences that address misconduct while enabling attorneys to continue serving clients under appropriate oversight.