Disciplinary History

An attorney received a public reprimand without general publication pursuant to the May 7, 2014, decision of the Disciplinary Commission for violating Rules 8.4(a), 8.4(c), and (g), Ala. R. Prof. C. In or about May of 2007, the attorney notarized a signature on a warranty deed outside the presence of the signer and without verifying his signature.

On September 10, 2014, an attorney received a private reprimand for violating Rules 1.3 and 1.4(a) and (b), and 1.16(d), Ala. R. Prof. C. In August of 2012, the attorney was hired by the complainant to file a petition to modify child support for a fee of $2,500.00. Thereafter, the attorney failed to file the petition to modify child support. Subsequently the complainant terminated representation of the attorney and requested that the attorney provide an accounting of the $2,500.00 fee, and a refund of any unearned portion of the fee. The attorney failed to provide a prompt accounting to the complainant, failed to provide a copy of the client’s file, and failed to return any portion of the fee.

On September 10, 2014, an attorney received a private reprimand for violating Rules 1.3 and 1.4(a) and (b), Ala. R. Prof. C. In February of 2012, the attorney was hired by the complainant to file a successive Rule 32 petition, and throughout the course of representation, the attorney was paid a total of $2,635.00. On at least one occasion, the attorney indicated to the complainant that he was preparing to file the successive Rule 32 petition, but subsequently failed to do so.

An attorney was suspended from the practice of law in Alabama for a period of 3 years effective August 13, 2014, with the imposition of the suspension deferred pending a 3-year probationary period. On August 13, 2014, the Disciplinary Commission accepted the attorney's Conditional Guilty Plea to violations of Rules 5.5(a)(2) and 8.4(a) and (g), Ala. R. Prof. C. The attorney admitted that he allowed a suspended attorney, to work in his office and provide him with ongoing and essential guidance necessary for the attorney to represent clients in numerous cases. The attorney allowed the suspended attorney to meet with an expert witness and correspond with opposing counsel regarding substantive legal and settlement issues on behalf of his clients. The attorney also shared an email account with the suspended lawyer, from which the suspended lawyer corresponded with an expert and opposing counsel in multiple matters and sent personal correspondence. The attorney allowed the suspended lawyer to provide legal services to a party for which the suspended attorney was compensated, corresponding with parties and counsel under the atorney's signature and on the letterhead of the attorney's firm. The suspended lawyer was regularly present in the attorney's office, and allowed access to the confidential information of the attorney's clients. The suspended attorney had not obtained permission from the Disciplinary Commission to seek employment in the legal profession pursuant to Rule 26, Ala. R. Disc. P.

On August 4, 2014, an attorney received a private reprimand for violating Rule 7.3, Ala. R. Prof. C. On or about February 3, 2014, the Office of General Counsel received information alleging that the attorney improperly sent electronic Facebook messages to two employees of the complainant’s company, soliciting employment. At that time, the attorney was representing other employees of the complainant’s company in an ongoing federal lawsuit alleging wage and hour violations. During the investigation, the attorney admitted to sending the direct Facebook messages to the employees, and stated that he was attempting to verify his clients’ claims of wage and hour violations.

An attorney received a private reprimand on July 3, 2014, for violating Rules 1.3 [Diligence] and 1.4(a), Ala. R. Prof. C. In or about July of 2009, the respondent attorney was hired to represent a client in a personal injury matter and the respondent attorney failed to perform required work for nearly two years. Within a week of the statute of limitations running the respondent attorney terminated the representation. Throughout the course of the representation the respondent attorney failed to return the client’s phone calls. The respondent attorney successfully completed one year of supervised probation prior to the issuance of the private reprimand. Had the respondent attorney failed to successfully complete probation, he would have received a public reprimand with general publication.

An attorney received a private reprimand on June 13, 2014, for violating Rules 1.4(a) and (b), Ala. R. Prof. C. In or about July of 2011, the respondent attorney was hired to represent a client in a criminal matter. After the client refused to accept a guilty plea deal, the respondent attorney was later indicted in February 2013 and interimly suspended from the practice of law. However, the respondent attorney failed to notify his client of the suspension of his license to practice law until April 2013. Additionally, the respondent attorney was removed from the case by the Court on March 18, 2013 and he failed to notify his client until April 18, 2013.

On June 12, 2014, an attorney received a private reprimand for violations of Rules 1.15(e) and 8.4(a), Ala. R. Prof. C. The respondent attorney was retained to represent a client on a contingency-fee basis. While the client did not dispute the terms of the contingency-fee agreement, the respondent attorney failed to retain a copy of the contingency-fee agreement.

An attorney was suspended from the practice of law in the State of Alabama for a period of ninety-one (91) days, by Order of the Supreme Court of Alabama, effective June 1, 2014. The Supreme Court entered its order based upon the Disciplinary Commission’s acceptance of the attorney's Conditional Guilty Plea, wherein the attorney pled guilty to violating Rules 1.3, 1.4(a) and (b), 1.16(d) and 8.4(d), Ala. R. Prof. C. The complainant hired the attorney in August of 2010 to probate the will of her deceased husband. The attorney assured the complaint that everything was progressing with the probate of the estate. Eventually, the complainant was unable to contact the attorney and was contacted by another attorney who advised that he had been appointed to represent her in the estate matter as a result of the attorney's failure to appear for several hearings. The attorney had also failed to appear before the court for a show cause hearing. According to the newly appointed attorney, the attorney failed to send all of the required notices to creditors of the estate, and failed to submit an inventory to the court. As a result, the attorney was taken off the case by the court and the other attorney was appointed. The appointed attorney stated that it appeared that the attorney had improperly advised the complainant to dispose of estate property by giving the property to her adult son. This property had to be retrieved and returned to the estate. The estate was subsequently completed by the appointed attorney.

On June 6, 2014, an attorney received a private reprimand for violating Rule 1.4(a) and (b), Ala. R. Prof. C. In October of 2013, the attorney was appointed to represent a client by a County District Court. The attorney failed to meet with or communicate with the client from the time of appointment until after the client filed a bar complaint on or about January 10, 2014.

On June 5, 2014, an attorney received a private reprimand for violating Rules 1.3, 1.4(a), and 1.16(d), Ala. R. Prof. C. In August of 2012, the attorney entered a notice of appearance on behalf of the complainants who had been sued for failing to repay a loan. An answer to the suit was not filed until after the plaintiffs filed a motion for summary judgment or default. The court denied the motion for default judgment and set the motion for summary judgment for hearing. The attorney sent a letter to the complainants informing them that in order for him to respond to the motion for summary judgment, they would need to pay an additional fee; however, the complainants denied ever receiving the letter or any notice that the attorney would no longer be representing them. The attorney failed to file a motion to withdraw from the matter and did not seek a continuance of the summary judgment hearing in order for the complainants to retain other counsel. As a result, the court issued a judgment against the complainants.

An attorney was issued a private reprimand on June 3, 2014, for violating Rules 1.3, 1.4(a) and (b), and 8.4(a) and (g), Ala. R. Prof. C. In or about December of 2010, despite being hired to do so, the respondent attorney failed or refused to file proceedings to evict the tenants of her client.

An attorney was issued a private reprimand on June 3, 2014, for violating Rules 1.3 and 1.4(a), Ala. R. Prof. C. In or about September of 2011, the respondent attorney failed to properly complete an adoption for her clients and failed to file the required paperwork with the Probate Court.

On May 22, 2014, an attorney received a private reprimand for violations of Rules 1.3, 1.4, and 8.4(a) and (g), Ala. R. Prof. C. The respondent attorney was retained by a bank to close a loan and issue a title policy in conjunction with a real estate transaction. Over the course of the next 10 months following the loan closing, the client inquired numerous times about the policy. The respondent attorney did not promptly or adequately respond to the inquiries. The policy was not issued until approximately one year after the closing.

An attorney was disbarred from the practice of law in the State of Alabama, effective May 14, 2014, by order of the Alabama Supreme Court. The Supreme Court entered its order based upon the decision of the Disciplinary Board, Panel III, of the Alabama State Bar finding the attorney guilty of violations of Rules 3.4(c) and 8.4 (a), (d) and (g), Ala. R. Prof. C. The attorney admitted that he knowingly failed to make restitution payments or submit quarterly reports as required by an order entered in a separate disciplinary proceeding, and failed to timely pay all costs of the prior proceeding. The attorney's knowing disobedience of an obligation under the rules of a tribunal violated the Alabama Rules of Professional Conduct.