In the Matter of Crummey

696 S.E.2d 589, 388 S.C. 286, 2010 S.C. LEXIS 262
CourtSupreme Court of South Carolina
DecidedJuly 26, 2010
Docket26840
StatusPublished
Cited by3 cases

This text of 696 S.E.2d 589 (In the Matter of Crummey) 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 the Matter of Crummey, 696 S.E.2d 589, 388 S.C. 286, 2010 S.C. LEXIS 262 (S.C. 2010).

Opinion

*287 PER CURIAM.

In this attorney disciplinary matter, respondent and the Office of Disciplinary Counsel (ODC) have entered into an Agreement for Discipline by Consent pursuant to Rule 21, RLDE, Rule 413, SCACR. In the agreement, respondent admits misconduct and consents to disbarment pursuant to Rule 7(b), RLDE, Rule 413, SCACR. In addition, respondent agrees to pay full restitution to clients, banks, and other persons and entities, including the Lawyers’ Fund for Client Protection, who have incurred losses as a result of her misconduct and to reimburse the Commission on Lawyer Conduct (the Commission) and ODC for costs incurred in the investigation and prosecution of this matter. We accept the agreement and disbar respondent from the practice of law in this state. Further, respondent shall pay full restitution to all clients, banks, and other persons and entities, including the Lawyers’ Fund, who have incurred losses as a result of her misconduct and reimburse the Commission and ODC for costs incurred in this matter. The facts, as set forth in the agreement, are as follows.

FACTS

Matter I

Respondent received checks and money orders from clients for payments to the clients’ mortgage lender. Respondent accepted the checks and money orders payable to the lender and deposited some of the checks and money orders into her trust accounts and operating account.

Respondent admits she failed, to make the mortgage payments for the clients, used the checks and money orders entrusted to her for purposes other than payment of the clients’ mortgage, made material misrepresentations to the court at the foreclosure hearing regarding her clients’ home, and that her failure to make her clients’ mortgage payments resulted in the clients’ home being sold at foreclosure.

Respondent acknowledges she failed to communicate with her clients regarding the foreclosure action. Respondent’s clients only learned that their home was sold at the foreclosure sale when approached by the lender’s real estate agent. *288 Due to respondent’s misconduct, her clients had to obtain new counsel in an effort to save their home. 1

Respondent admits she failed to safeguard her clients’ funds. Further, she admits she wrote checks from her trust accounts for expenses such as employee payroll, her children’s school programs, parking tickets, and restaurant charges.

Respondent acknowledges her trust accounts have carried a negative balance and that she had trust account checks returned for insufficient funds. She admits she did not reconcile her trust accounts, did not keep individual client ledgers, and did not retain the bank statements for her trust accounts, all of which are required by Rule 417, SCACR. In addition, she admits her records are in such disarray that the trust accounts cannot be reconciled. Respondent agrees she failed to cooperate with ODC as she failed to respond to the Notice of Full Investigation in this matter. 2

Matter II

Respondent admits she failed to communicate with her client in this matter regarding a probate case. Respondent settled the probate matter and funds in the amount of $6,538.90 were to be refunded to the client. Respondent admits she failed to remit the funds to her client.

Respondent admits that her client filed an action against her in summary court and was awarded a judgment. The client filed a claim with the Lawyer’s Fund and was awarded $5,788.90.

Respondent acknowledges the client’s funds are not in her trust accounts. Respondent admits she failed to cooperate with ODC in that she did not respond to the Notice of Full Investigation in this matter.

Matter III

Clients retained respondent to represent them in a civil matter. Respondent admits she failed to diligently and com *289 petently represent the clients, failed to communicate adequately, failed to return telephone calls in a timely manner, failed to advise the clients regarding court appearances, and failed to give them timely notice of hearings. In addition, respondent did not make timely court appearances on behalf of clients and failed to produce discovery requests to opposing counsel. Respondent admits her misconduct in the civil action caused delays in the prosecution of the ease. Respondent further admits that she did not cooperate with ODC as she failed to respond to the Supplemental Notice of Full Investigation in this matter.

Matter IV

Respondent admits that, as of July 2009, she had three fraudulent check charges which had been pending in Summary Court since June 2003. Respondent agrees she failed to timely resolve these charges, but asserts the charges have now been dismissed and expunged.

Matter V

Respondent was appointed by the Charleston County Probate Court as Special Administrator to handle the Estate of Doe. Respondent admits she informed Doe’s family that the estate would disburse funds to the family in October 2008 and that she informed the family in writing as to the amount of the disbursement. Respondent admits none of the family has received any disbursements from the estate and that she does not have the funds to disburse to the family. Further, respondent concedes she does not have records that would account for the funds of the estate. Respondent admits she failed to cooperate with ODC in that she did not respond to the Supplemental Notice of Full Investigation in this matter.

Matter VI

Respondent admits she drafted a will for Client A naming herself as Personal Representative and Trustee of his trust. Respondent admits she did not have Client A seek the advice of other counsel prior to naming herself Personal Representative and Trustee. Further, respondent admits she had her family members witness both the will and trust and a member *290 of her family served as the notary for the execution of the will and trust.

Respondent agrees that, as Trustee, she was to make payments to maintain Client A’s residence and for the benefit of his spouse. She admits she did not make the payments to maintain the residence or support the spouse.

Respondent admits she has taken funds belonging to the trust and converted those funds to her use. Respondent acknowledges the Probate Court ordered that she be replaced as Personal Representative and Trustee. Respondent agrees she failed to make an accounting to the new Personal Representative and to the Probate Court and has been held in contempt by the Probate Court for her failure to cooperate with the court. Respondent further admits she failed to cooperate with ODC as she did not respond to the Supplemental Notice of Full Investigation in this matter.

Matter VII

Respondent admits she failed to pay a court reporter for a deposition transcript that was originally invoiced on October 20, 2008, in the amount of $359.25.

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

Related

In the Matter of William Franklin Warren, III
787 S.E.2d 528 (Supreme Court of South Carolina, 2016)
In re Samaha
731 S.E.2d 277 (Supreme Court of South Carolina, 2012)
In Re Taylor
723 S.E.2d 366 (Supreme Court of South Carolina, 2012)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
696 S.E.2d 589, 388 S.C. 286, 2010 S.C. LEXIS 262, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/in-the-matter-of-crummey-sc-2010.