In re Dahle

Supreme Court of South Carolina

In re Dahle

804 S.E.2d 268, 420 S.C. 521, 2017 WL 4078855, 2017 S.C. LEXIS 134

CourtSupreme Court of South Carolina

DecidedSeptember 14, 2017

DocketAppellate Case Nos. 2016-001630; 2016-001767

StatusPublished

This text of 804 S.E.2d 268 (In re Dahle) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Supreme Court of South Carolina primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

In re Dahle, 804 S.E.2d 268, 420 S.C. 521, 2017 WL 4078855, 2017 S.C. LEXIS 134 (S.C. 2017).

Pincite

Opinion

ORDER

On July 25, 2011, the Court suspended Petitioner from the practice of law for one year pursuant to the reciprocal disciplinary provisions of Rule 29 of the Rules for Lawyer Disciplinary Enforcement (RLDE) found in Rule 413 of the South Carolina Appellate Court Rules (SCACR). In the Matter of Dahle, 393 S.C. 576, 713 S.E.2d 617 (2011). On June 8, 2012, the Court administratively suspended Petitioner for failure to comply with continuing legal education requirements. Petitioner has now filed a Petition for Reinstatement pursuant to Rule 33, RLDE, and a Petition for Reinstatement pursuant to Rule 419(e), SCACR.

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

/s/ Donald W. Beatty, C.J.

/s/ John W. Kittredge, J.

/s/ Kaye G. Hearn, J.

/s/ John Cannon Few, J.

/s/ George C. James, Jr., J.

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

ORDER

On July 25, 2011, the Court suspended Petitioner from the practice of law for one year pursuant to the reciprocal disciplinary provisions of Rule 29 of the Rules for Lawyer Disciplinary Enforcement (RLDE) found in Rule 413 of the South Carolina Appellate Court Rules (SCACR). In the Matter of Dahle, 393 S.C. 576, 713 S.E.2d 617 (2011). On June 8, 2012, the Court administratively suspended Petitioner for failure to comply with continuing legal education requirements. Petitioner has now filed a Petition for Reinstatement pursuant to Rule 33, RLDE, and a Petition for Reinstatement pursuant to Rule 419(e), SCACR.

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

/s/ Donald W. Beatty, C.J.

/s/ John W. Kittredge, J.

/s/ Kaye G. Hearn, J.

/s/ John Cannon Few, J.

/s/ George C. James, Jr., J.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

804 S.E.2d 268, 420 S.C. 521, 2017 WL 4078855, 2017 S.C. LEXIS 134, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/in-re-dahle-sc-2017.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack