Montgomery attorney Walter James, III was disbarred from the practice of law in the State of Alabama by order of the Supreme Court of Alabama, effective March 17, 2020. The Supreme Court entered its order based on the Disciplinary Board’s order accepting James’s Consent to Disbarment, which was based upon an investigation involving James’s misappropriation of public funds while an assistant principal at Jefferson Davis High School in Montgomery, Alabama.

On March 13, 2020, the Disciplinary Commission of the Alabama State Bar issued a private reprimand to an attorney for violating Rules 3.1(a) [Meritorious Claims and Contentions] and 3.3(a)(1) [Candor Toward the Tribunal], Alabama Rules of Professional Conduct. In June of 2018, the attorney filed a Verified Motion for Ex Parte Custody and Relief on behalf of her client. The motion included the allegation that opposing counsel in the case called the minor child’s daycare and threatened to put out warrants on the daycare and the mother if the daycare did not release the child to the child’s father. The attorney repeated the allegation regarding opposing counsel in her sworn attorney affidavit that accompanied the motion. However, the attorney later admitted that she did not have personal knowledge of any such conduct by opposing counsel. Despite not having personal knowledge of the opposing attorney’s alleged conduct, the attorney repeated the allegation in her sworn attorney affidavit. The allegation was untrue. As such, the attorney knowingly provided false information to the court by swearing to an allegation of misconduct by opposing counsel when, in fact, she had no personal knowledge of any misconduct.

On March 12, 2020, an attorney received a private reprimand for violating Rules 1.15(a) [Safekeeping Property], 8.4(a) and 8.4(g) [Misconduct], Alabama Rules of Professional Conduct. The respondent attorney was retained by a client to assist with the filing of a divorce complaint. The respondent attorney stated that correspondence was sent to the complainant informing him of the date and time set for trial. The complainant alleged he missed a court date because the respondent attorney failed to notify him. When requested by the Office of General Counsel to provide proof she notified her client of the court date, the respondent attorney was only able to provide Microsoft Word documents lacking a firm letterhead or her signature. The respondent attorney also failed to provide records of any other attempts to contact the complainant regarding the court date. Lastly, the respondent attorney admitted that she failed to keep copies of the actual correspondence and stated she only saved the “Word” copy to retain for her files.

Butler attorney James David Abston, III was transferred to Inactive Status, effective March 12, 2020, by Order of the Supreme Court of Alabama. The Supreme Court entered its Order based upon the March 11, 2020 Order of Panel I of the Disciplinary Board of the Alabama State Bar in response to a Abston’s petition filed with the Office of General Counsel requesting he be transferred to inactive status.

Montgomery attorney, Elizabeth Vickers Addison was transferred to inactive status effective February 25, 2020, by Order of the Supreme Court of Alabama. The Supreme Court entered its Order based upon the February 25, 2020 Order of Panel III of the Disciplinary Board of the Alabama State Bar in response to Addison’s petition submitted to the Office of General Counsel requesting she be transferred to inactive status.

On January 31, 2020, the Disciplinary Commission of the Alabama State Bar issued a private reprimand to an attorney for violating Rules 1.2 [Scope of Representation] and 1.4 [Communication], Alabama Rules of Professional Conduct. In August of 2016, an individual was struck by a car while riding a motorcycle. The individual hired the law firm to represent her on her personal injury claim. The individual moved frequently during the course of representation and sometimes communication was difficult. The attorney was assigned to handle all pre-suit matters and negotiation until she left the firm in January of 2019. After the attorney’s departure from the firm, a review was conducted of the attorney’s pending cases and it was learned the last noted communication with the individual occurred in April 2018. The attorney settled the individual’s case with an insurance company for $47,500 on August 17, 2018, two days before the expiration of the statute of limitations. On August 29, 2018, the attorney received the settlement check and turned it over to the firm’s comptroller where it was subsequently deposited into trust. In December 2018, the firm questioned the attorney as to why the funds remained in trust and had not been disbursed to the client. The attorney informed the firm she was still negotiating medical liens associated with the accident. After the attorney’s departure from the firm, the firm learned the attorney never sought the individual’s consent to the settlement and failed to forward the release to the individual. After a review of the file and call logs for the individual’s case, it was determined that the attorney failed to communicate with the individual before or after the attorney accepted the settlement on individuals’ behalf.

On January 31, 2020, the Disciplinary Commission of the Alabama State Bar issued a private reprimand to an attorney for violating Rules 7.2 [Advertising] and 8.2 [Judicial and Legal Officials], Alabama Rules of Professional Conduct. In May 2019, the Office of General Counsel of the Alabama State Bar received information regarding a website operated by the attorney. The attorney used the site to disparage various police officers, city attorneys, district attorneys and/or assistant district attorneys. Furthermore, the attorney used the website to advertise their law office and to invite those falsely accused of a crime in the area where the attorney practiced law or in that same judicial district in which it was located, to contact the attorney. However, the website was not filed with the Office of General Counsel and did not contain the disclaimer as required by Rule 7.2, Alabama Rules of Professional Conduct.

Sulligent attorney Daniel Heath Boman was suspended from the practice of law in the State of Alabama for a period of two (2) years by the Supreme Court of Alabama, effective January 23, 2020. The Supreme Court entered its order based upon the Disciplinary Board’s Order, wherein Boman was found guilty of violating Rules 8.4(d) and (g) [Misconduct], Alabama Rules of Professional Conduct. In December 2015, while holding himself out as a lawyer, Boman used racist, misogynistic, and threatening language toward customer service representatives regarding an appointment for an in-home appliance recall repair.

A Double Springs attorney received a public reprimand without general publication on January 10, 2020, as ordered by the Disciplinary Commission of the Alabama State Bar, for violating Rules 5.5 [Unauthorized Practice of Law], and 8.4(d) and (g) [Misconduct], Alabama Rules of Professional Conduct. On January 15, 2019, the attorney was officially listed as inactive after failing to renew his occupational license. Prior to being listed as inactive, the attorney received several notifications from September 1, 2018 to January 15, 2019, reminding him to renew his occupational license. On February 15, 2019, the Winston County Sheriff’s Office notified the Bar that on February 13, 2019, the attorney attempted to visit a legal client at the county jail while not licensed to practice law. The attorney subsequently admitted to the Bar he was acting as legal counsel in twelve separate legal matters on behalf of four separate clients, including the client in the Winston County jail, while unlicensed to practice law.

A Sylacauga attorney received a public reprimand without general publication on January 10, 2020, as ordered by the Disciplinary Commission of the Alabama State Bar, for violating Rules 5.5 [Unauthorized Practice of Law], and 8.4 (d) and (g) [Misconduct], Alabama Rules of Professional Conduct. On January 12, 2018, the attorney was officially listed as inactive after failing to renew his occupational license. Prior to being listed as inactive, the attorney received several notifications from September 1, 2017 to January 12, 2018, reminding him to renew his occupational license. On April 26, 2019, the attorney submitted a letter to the Office of General Counsel wherein he admitted that he continued to engage in the practice of law after failing to renew his occupational license for 2018 and 2019. While unlicensed in 2018, the attorney served as a GAL for the Talladega County Probate Court on three separate occasions. In addition, the attorney assisted clients with Medicaid long-term care placement, probated simple estates, and prepared simple wills and powers of attorneys in 2018 and 2019. The attorney subsequently renewed his occupational license on April 30, 2019.

Birmingham attorney Martin Kassab Berks received a Public Reprimand with General Publication on October 11, 2019 for violating Rule 1.4 [Communication], Ala. R. Prof. C. In 2001 and 2004, Berks was hired by clients to handle asbestos related claims on their or their spouse’s behalf. Over the course of several years, Berks received settlement checks related to the asbestos claims. Thereafter, the clients attempted to contact Berks to inquire about the status of settlements from additional claims. However, they were unable to get in contact with him, despite numerous attempts. In October of 2015, after previously suffering severe injuries for a motor vehicle accident, Berks ceased the practice of law. At the time, Berks handed off his cases to another attorney with the belief that the attorney would contact all of Berks’s current clients, inform them of his cessation of the practice of law, and that the new attorney would be taking over their cases. However, the clients were not made aware that Berks was no longer practicing law, by either himself or the other attorney. In addition, Berks failed to notify the clients that the other attorney would now be handling their legal matters.

Birmingham attorney Martin Kassab Berks received a Public Reprimand with General Publication on October 11, 2019 for violating Rule 1.4 [Communication], Ala. R. Prof. C. In 2001 and 2004, Berks was hired by clients to handle asbestos related claims on their or their spouse’s behalf. Over the course of several years, Berks received settlement checks related to the asbestos claims. Thereafter, the clients attempted to contact Berks to inquire about the status of settlements from additional claims. However, they were unable to get in contact with him, despite numerous attempts. In October of 2015, after previously suffering severe injuries for a motor vehicle accident, Berks ceased the practice of law. At the time, Berks handed off his cases to another attorney with the belief that the attorney would contact all of Berks’s current clients, inform them of his cessation of the practice of law, and that the new attorney would be taking over their cases. However, the clients were not made aware that Berks was no longer practicing law, by either himself or the other attorney. In addition, Berks failed to notify the clients that the other attorney would now be handling their legal matters.

On January 10, 2020, Birmingham attorney Jack Bernard McNamee received a public reprimand with general publication for violating Rules 8.4(c) and 8.4(g) [Misconduct], Ala. R. Prof. C. The pertinent facts are the violations arose out of a dispute with the Internal Revenue Service (“IRS”) over amounts owed in unpaid taxes. McNamee retained counsel who actively engaged in negotiations with the IRS. In an effort to reduce the amount owed, he paid the past amounts due as aggressively as he was financially able and sold assets including the office building housing his law practice as well as multiple parcels of land. During this time, the Office of General Counsel received multiple tax notices from the IRS. Despite these efforts and his bankruptcy filing, the United States Department of Treasury (“Treasury”) still held valid liens against him for personal income taxes (1040) for the years 2013, 2014 and 2015 and the Treasury holds valid liens against him for federal unemployment taxes (940) for the years 2009 and 2010. Additionally, the Treasury holds valid liens against him for employee withholding taxes (941) for the third and fourth quarter of 2009, all four quarters of 2010, and the first quarter of 2011. With this conduct McNamee violated Rules 8.4(c) and 8.4(g), Ala. R. Prof. C., by engaging in conduct involving dishonesty, fraud, deceit, and misrepresentation while also engaging in conduct adversely reflecting on his fitness to practice law. McNamee is also required pay any costs taxed against him pursuant to Rule 33, Ala. R. Disc. P, including but not limited to a $1,000 administrative fee.

On January 10, 2020, the Disciplinary Commission of the Alabama State Bar issued a private reprimand to an attorney for violating Rules 1.2 [Scope of Representation], 5.4 [Professional Independence of a Lawyer], and 8.4 [Misconduct], Alabama Rules of Professional Conduct. In May 2018, a client went to a law firm to seek assistance with the bond of her fiancé regarding an immigration matter. The client met with a paralegal at the firm. The paralegal informed the client the attorney would have to represent the client in court via a telephone hearing. The law firm is owned solely by an attorney who formerly practiced in Alabama before he returned to his home state of Ohio. The paralegal, formerly an employee of the attorney’s firm, has been an independent contractor of the firm for the last seven years and is paid on a flat fee basis per case. When a prospective client calls or comes by the firm, the paralegal takes the intake information, informs the client of the fee amount, and assigns the case to one of a few attorneys whom she uses. The client was quoted a fee of $1,500.00, which she paid. The flat fee, which was paid by check, was deposited into the firm’s operating account, then split equally between the paralegal and the attorney.

On January 10, 2020, the Disciplinary Commission of the Alabama State Bar issued a private reprimand to an attorney for violating Rules 1.1 [Competence], 1.3 [Diligence], 1.4 [Communication], and 8.4 (d) and (g) [Misconduct], Alabama Rules of Professional Conduct. The attorney was retained by a client to represent him on a personal injury claim regarding a car accident that occurred on October 30, 2014. Over the next four and a half years, the client had difficulty communicating with the attorney and obtaining information regarding the status of his personal injury claim. After being unable to contact the attorney, the client consulted with another attorney regarding his personal injury claim. During the consultation, the client learned the attorney had filed suit on his behalf on November 1, 2016, one day after the statute of limitations had expired. After filing the initial complaint, the attorney took no further action in the matter until March 2019. From November 1, 2016 to the filing of the bar complaint, the attorney did not inform the client that service had not been perfected or that the suit had been filed after the expiration of the statute of limitations. In August 2019, the attorney was able to settle the client’s case with the defendant’s insurance company for $7,500.00. The insurance company agreed to waive the statute of limitations. In addition, the attorney settled the client’s legal malpractice claim for $10,000.