In re Bell

405 S.E.2d 825, 304 S.C. 529, 1991 S.C. LEXIS 113
Supreme Court of South Carolina·Decided May 28, 1991·No. 23406·Published·Cited by 3 cases

Opinion

Per Curiam:

A complaint was filed in this attorney grievance matter alleging that respondent committed various acts of professional misconduct. Respondent has conditionally admitted certain allegations and consents to a public reprimand. We accept the conditional admission and publicly reprimand respondent.

Respondent conditionally admits he negligently failed to maintain proper book-keeping practices in his office and negligently failed to properly supervise his staff. Because of this negligence, client funds were not timely disbursed and expenses were incorrectly posted to client accounts. Respondent is therefore publicly reprimanded.

Public Reprimand.

Finney and Toal, JJ., not participating.

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

In re Bell, 405 S.E.2d 825, 304 S.C. 529, 1991 S.C. LEXIS 113 (S.C. 1991).

405 S.E.2d 825 (In re Bell) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Matter of Marshall
498 S.E.2d 869 (Supreme Court of South Carolina, 1998)
In re Bowen
469 S.E.2d 46 (Supreme Court of South Carolina, 1996)
State v. Wright
405 S.E.2d 825 (Supreme Court of South Carolina, 1991)