Legal Opinion

In the Matter of Alma Defillo

Supreme Court of South Carolina

Decided August 13, 2014No. Appellate Case 2014-001077; 27431Published

1Per curiam

Respondent is licensed to practice law in Florida; she is not licensed to practice law in South Carolina. In November 2013, the Office of Disciplinary Counsel (ODC) filed Formal Charges against respondent alleging she operated a law firm and offered legal services in South Carolina. In addition, ODC alleged that respondent advertised and solicited clients in South Carolina in violation of Rule 7, RPC, Rule 413, SCACR, and Rule 418, SCACR. Respondent did not answer the Formal Charges, was found to be in default, and is therefore deemed to have admitted the factual allegations made in those…

2Cases cited3 opinions

  1. In Re HallSupreme Court of South Carolina · 1998
  2. In re Van SonSupreme Court of South Carolina · 2013
  3. In re BergerSupreme Court of South Carolina · 2014

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

Powered by the Exa API