In re Workman

473 S.E.2d 448, 322 S.C. 530, 1996 S.C. LEXIS 126
CourtSupreme Court of South Carolina
DecidedJuly 11, 1996
StatusPublished

This text of 473 S.E.2d 448 (In re Workman) 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 Workman, 473 S.E.2d 448, 322 S.C. 530, 1996 S.C. LEXIS 126 (S.C. 1996).

Opinion

ORDER

This matter is before the Court by way of two petitions seeking appointment as the attorney to assume responsibility for Mr. Workman’s client files, trust account(s), escrow account^), operating account(s), and any other law office accounts Mr. Workman may have maintained. Both petitions are denied.

IT IS ORDERED that James W. Hudgens, Esquire, is hereby appointed to assume responsibility for Mr. Workman’s client files, trust account(s), escrow account(s), operating accounts) and any other law office accounts Mr. Workman may have maintained. Mr. Hudgens shall take action as required by Paragraph 33, Rule 413, SCACR, to protect the interests [531]*531of Mr. Workman’s clients and may make disbursements from Mr. Workman’s trust, escrow, and/or operating account(s) as are necessary to effectuate this appointment.

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that this Order, when served on any bank or other financial institution maintaining trust, escrow and/or operating account(s) of Joseph H. Workman, shall serve as notice to the bank or other financial institution that James W. Hudgens, Esquire, has been duly appointed by this Court.

This Order shall be made public.

/s/ Ernest T. Howell. Jr.. C.J.

FOR THE COURT

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

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
473 S.E.2d 448, 322 S.C. 530, 1996 S.C. LEXIS 126, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/in-re-workman-sc-1996.