In re Shelley
Supreme Court of South Carolina
1Per curiam
This is an attorney disciplinary matter. Respondent was found to have violated Rule 1.4 of Rule 407, SCACR, by failing to communicate with two clients; DRs 1-102(A)(4) and (5), 2-106, 2-107(A)(2) and (3), S. Ct. R. 32, in a third matter; and DR 1-102(A)(4) in a fourth.1 In addition, respondent was found to have mishandled his trust account, and to have exhibited a pattern of indifference in fulfilling his commitments and responsibilities to his clients, the Bar, and the Judiciary. The Hearing Panel concluded, “The manner in which Respondent has practiced his profession conclusively…
2Cases cited1 opinion
- In re ShelleySupreme Court of South Carolina · 1991
3Cited by1 opinion
- Daynard v. Ness, Motley, Loadholt, Richardson & Poole, P.A.District Court, D. Massachusetts · 2001