In re Parker

Supreme Court of South Carolina

In re Parker

580 S.E.2d 144, 354 S.C. 209, 2003 S.C. LEXIS 87

Supreme Court of South Carolina·Decided April 28, 2003·No. No. 25636·Published

Opinion

PER CURIAM:

By way of the attached order of the Board of Professional Responsibility of the Supreme Court of Tennessee, respondent was publicly censured for misconduct involving an irrevocable family trust agreement he established for a client.¹

We find that the misconduct established warrants a public reprimand in this state as well. See Rule 29(d), RLDE, Rule 413, SCACR. Accordingly, respondent is hereby publicly reprimanded for the misconduct set forth in the order of the Board of Professional Responsibility of the Supreme Court of Tennessee.

PUBLIC REPRIMAND.

TOAL, C.J., MOORE, WALLER, BURNETT and PLEICONES, JJ., concur.

ATTACHMENT

Footnotes

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

PER CURIAM:

By way of the attached order of the Board of Professional Responsibility of the Supreme Court of Tennessee, respondent was publicly censured for misconduct involving an irrevocable family trust agreement he established for a client.¹

We find that the misconduct established warrants a public reprimand in this state as well. See Rule 29(d), RLDE, Rule 413, SCACR. Accordingly, respondent is hereby publicly reprimanded for the misconduct set forth in the order of the Board of Professional Responsibility of the Supreme Court of Tennessee.

PUBLIC REPRIMAND.

TOAL, C.J., MOORE, WALLER, BURNETT and PLEICONES, JJ., concur.

ATTACHMENT

Footnotes

In re Parker, 580 S.E.2d 144, 354 S.C. 209, 2003 S.C. LEXIS 87 (S.C. 2003).

Pincite

580 S.E.2d 144 (In re Parker) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.