Ozark As Non-Fiction: Acquitted Attorney Consents To Disbarment

An attorney who was acquitted of murder charges has consented to disbarment by the Kansas Supreme Court

In 2012, the Disciplinary Administrator initiated an investigation of the respondent Susan Elizabeth Van Note, an attorney admitted to the practice of law in the state of Kansas, after she was charged in Missouri with two counts of murder. That investigation resulted in the Disciplinary Administrator alleging the respondent committed professional misconduct in violation of Kansas Rule of Professional Conduct 8.4 (2020 Kan. S. Ct. R. 394).

On November 21, 2012, this court temporarily suspended respondent’s license to practice law during the pendency of the disciplinary proceedings pursuant to Supreme Court Rule 203(b) (2011 Kan. Ct. R. Annot. 280). Respondent’s license remains temporarily suspended.

In 2017, a jury acquitted respondent of the murder charges. A wrongful death lawsuit also pending against the respondent was subsequently settled, and the Missouri Supreme Court disbarred the respondent from the practice of law in Missouri.

The Missouri discipline was imposed by default. 

Lake News Online reported on the trial of the attorney for the murder of her father and his girlfriend.

Lake Expo News noted that the crime took place on Lake of the Ozarks.

The prosecution’s main evidence centered on motive — William Van Note’s estate was worth around $7 million — and a call from Liz’s cell phone that pinged off a tower near the scene of the crime shortly after the attack. Liz had told investigators she was in Lee’s Summit, Mo — about 2.5 hours away — that night.

Columbia Daily Tribune carried news of the verdict

Susan Van Note is not guilty — so said the jury in her trial for the double homicide of her father William Van Note and his girlfriend Sharon Dickson. The seven women and five men of the Laclede County jury reached their verdict of not guilty on two counts each of first and second degree murder at approximately 6:30 p.m. Feb. 14.

The decision on the charges from the Oct. 2, 2010 attacks that killed two people came on the eighth day of the trial after the sequestered jury of 12 heard from forensic experts, friends of the family, financial advisors and police. Though they did not hear direct testimony from the defendant herself, jurors heard nearly three hours of interviews between investigators and Susan Van Note in the days after the attack. It was that evidence and the 911 call by William Van Note to Morgan County Dispatch that the jury asked to hear again as it went into deliberations Tuesday.

…Sharon Dickson was a victim of three gunshot wounds and 18 stab wounds, dying from extensive bleeding at the scene, while William Van Note initially survived three gunshot wounds — including a shot to his head — and a stab wound to the back before he was taken off life support by his next-of-kin — Susan Van Note. The couple who also had homes in Florida and Kansas City were killed at their lakefront home in the Sunrise Beach area.

Susan Van Note was arrested for their deaths in 2012.

After the prosecution rested its case Friday— which relied heavily on financial motive and a ping on a Sunrise Beach cell tower from Susan Van Note’s phone around the time of the attacks — the defense team for Susan Van Note worked to raise reasonable doubt about the charges levied against the Lee’s Summit woman.

Attorney Tom Bath did most of the questioning Saturday and Monday for the defense as they brought forth witnesses and documents that raised the specter of other possible suspects and forensic evidence that didn’t conclusively put the defendant at the scene while bringing a family friend of William’s who corroborated Susan Van Note’s explanation of family dynamics and William’s wishes about life support.

Part of the case was tied to Susan Van Note having her father taken off life support while at University Hospital in Columbia, forging a Durable Power of Attorney in the aftermath of the attacks though ultimately it was her status as next-of-kin that allowed her to make that decision rather than the DPOA.

Kansas City Star reported on the related probate case in depth. (Mike Frisch)