## Facts

- Karin Marie Kendrick, admitted to the Maryland bar in 1994, served as co-personal representative and lawyer for the Estate of Judith Nina Kerr, alongside Oliver Kerr.
- The estate was valued at approximately $60,000 and opened in 1999.
- Estate funds were used to pay $6,000 in legal fees connected to Kendrick: $3,000 to her then-firm and $3,000 directly to Kendrick.
- Kendrick did not petition the Orphans’ Court for authorization of those fee payments; she maintained the payments were acceptable because Oliver Kerr consented as co-personal representative and sole heir.
- Kendrick lacked meaningful probate experience and repeatedly failed for years to make required estate filings, prompting multiple delinquency notices and court summonses.
- The Orphans’ Court removed Kendrick and Oliver Kerr as co-personal representatives and ordered them to file a final account and deliver all assets and records within 30 days.
- Kendrick and Oliver failed to comply with turnover and accounting orders and were subjected to civil contempt sanctions; the estate took nearly nine years to close.
- Disciplinary charges alleged violations of MRPC 1.1, 1.3, 1.5, 1.15, and 8.4; after an evidentiary hearing, the hearing judge found violations of MRPC 1.1, 1.3, 1.5(a), and 1.15(a), (d), (e), but not MRPC 8.4.

## Issues

1. Whether Kendrick’s probate administration and handling of estate funds violated MRPC 1.1 (competence), 1.3 (diligence), 1.5(a) (unreasonable fees), and 1.15(a), (d), (e) (safekeeping, delivery, and accounting).
2. What sanction was appropriate given prolonged mismanagement and rule violations, but no finding of intentional dishonesty under MRPC 8.4.

## Decision

- The Court of Appeals of Maryland adopted the hearing judge’s findings and concluded Kendrick violated MRPC 1.1, 1.3, 1.5(a), and 1.15(a), (d), (e).
- The Court agreed the evidence did not establish a violation of MRPC 8.4.
- The Court imposed an indefinite suspension from the practice of law, allowing application for reinstatement subject to conditions including appropriate restitution to the estate and proof of remediation.

## Legal Principles

- MRPC 1.1 is violated when a lawyer undertakes a matter without the necessary knowledge and preparation and then fails to perform basic required tasks over an extended period.
- MRPC 1.3 is violated by prolonged inaction, repeated missed deadlines, and sustained failure to comply with court-required probate filings and orders.
- MRPC 1.5(a) prohibits collecting an unreasonable fee; taking estate funds as fees without required court approval may be unreasonable, even if an heir or co-fiduciary consents.
- MRPC 1.15(a), (d), and (e) require segregation and protection of client/third-party property, prompt delivery of property to those entitled to receive it, and full accounting; failure to turn over estate assets and records and failure to account can violate these duties without proof of intentional theft.
- In attorney discipline, the sanction serves to protect the public and the legal profession; indefinite suspension may be appropriate for serious incompetence and neglect where intentional dishonesty is not proven.

## Conclusion

The court indefinitely suspended Kendrick for chronic incompetence and neglect in probate administration, collecting fees from estate funds without required authorization, and failing to safeguard, deliver, and account for estate property, while declining to find intentional misconduct under MRPC 8.4.


Att’y Grievance Comm’n of Maryland v. Kendrick, 403 Md. 489, 943 A.2d 1173 (2008)