In re Allmon

792 S.E.2d 239, 418 S.C. 279, 2016 S.C. LEXIS 360
Supreme Court of South Carolina·Decided October 21, 2016·No. Appellate Case Nos. 2016-000209 and 2016-000163·Published

Opinion

ORDER

On May 22, 2013, the Court administratively suspended petitioner pursuant to Rule 419(d)(2) of the South Carolina Appellate Court Rules (SCACR). On January 15, 2014, the Court accepted an Agreement for Discipline by Consent en[280] tered into between petitioner and the Office of Disciplinary-Counsel and suspended petitioner from the practice of law for one year retroactive to January 16, 2013, the date of petitioner’s interim suspension. In the Matter of Allmon, 407 S.C. 24, 753 S.E.2d 544 (2014). Petitioner has now filed a Petition for Reinstatement pursuant to Rule 419(e), SCACR, and a Petition for Reinstatement pursuant to Rule 33 of the Rules for Lawyer Disciplinary Enforcement contained in Rule 413, SCACR.

After thorough consideration of the entire record, the Court grants both Petitions for Reinstatement.

s/Costa M. Pleicones, C.J.

s/John W. Kittredge, J.

s/Kaye G. Hearn, J.

We would deny both Petitions for Reinstatement.

s/Donald W. Beatty, J.

s/John Cannon Few, J.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

In re Allmon, 792 S.E.2d 239, 418 S.C. 279, 2016 S.C. LEXIS 360 (S.C. 2016).

792 S.E.2d 239 (In re Allmon) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

In re Allmon
753 S.E.2d 544 (Supreme Court of South Carolina, 2014)