Legal Opinion

In re Cromartie

Supreme Court of South Carolina

Decided April 10, 2000No. 25106PublishedCited by 2 opinions

1Per curiam

In this attorney disciplinary matter, respondent and disciplinary counsel have entered into an agreement under Rule 21 of the Rules for Lawyer Disciplinary Enforcement (RLDE) contained in Rule 413, SCACR. In the agreement, respondent admits misconduct and consents to a public reprimand. We accept the agreement.

Respondent is the senior partner in the firm of E.W. Cromartie, II, in Columbia. Respondent employed attorney Matthew E. Davis as an associate whose primary duty was real estate transactions. Recently, we publicly reprimanded Davis for his misconduct associated with real estate…

2Cases cited1 opinion

  1. In Re DavisSupreme Court of South Carolina · 2000

3Cited by2 opinions

  1. In re ZennerSupreme Court of South Carolina · 2002
  2. In re CromartieSupreme Court of South Carolina · 2012

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

Powered by the Exa API