In Re Craven
Supreme Court of South Carolina
1Concurring in part, dissenting in partLittlejohn, Justice
(concurring and dissenting) :
I agree with the per curiam opinion which holds that the respondent is guilty of violating Disciplinary Rules 2-103 and 2-104 of Canon II of the Code of Professional Responsibility, Supreme Court Rule 32, which prohibit solicitation *37of business by a member of the bar. I concur in the majority opinion which holds, “. . . we find respondent’s actions reprehensible in stirring up litigation, in bringing the legal profession into disrepute, and by intruding himself and his employee into people’s privacy, especially those recovering from accidents and the loss of loved…
2Cases cited2 opinions
- In Re BloomSupreme Court of South Carolina · 1975
- In Re CrosbySupreme Court of South Carolina · 1971