The South Carolina Supreme Court publicly reprimanded a lawyer who accepted title-policy fees but failed to issue the policy, respond to the client, or preserve the file.
The Supreme Court accepted the agreement and suspended Brown for one year. The sanction reflected both the client-service violations and repeated failure to cooperate with the disciplinary system, considered alongside his prior discipline. Brown must comply with the rule governing suspended lawyers, pay disciplinary costs, and complete Ethics School within one year after reinstatement.
The Supreme Court accepted discipline by consent and imposed an eighteen-month definite suspension, retroactive to Gilchrist’s July 29, 2022 interim suspension. The court stressed the seriousness of financial dishonesty, misrepresentations, and her failure to self-report the indictment. Cooperation, repayment, and other mitigation did not reduce the sanction below the agreed range. She must also pay the investigation and prosecution costs.
The Supreme Court accepted the agreement and publicly reprimanded Compton. It found violations of the professional rules governing competence, diligence, communication, and related responsibilities. The court also required payment of disciplinary costs, an assessment through Lawyers Helping Lawyers with compliance with resulting recommendations, and completion of Ethics School within one year.
The Supreme Court accepted the agreement and imposed a definite six-month suspension. It treated the pattern and Owen’s disciplinary history as important aggravating considerations, while also considering the mitigating material submitted with the agreement. Owen must comply with the rule governing suspended lawyers, pay disciplinary costs, and complete the Legal Ethics and Practice Program Ethics School within one year.