Date
Discipline Imposed
Description
1/11/2018
Suspended
Andalusia attorney Willie Clyde Harr, III was summarily suspended pursuant to Rule 20a, Ala. R. Disc. P., from the practice of law in the State of Alabama by the Disciplinary…
Read more »
Date: 1/11/2018
Discipline Imposed: Suspended
Description:
Andalusia attorney Willie Clyde Harr, III was summarily suspended pursuant to Rule 20a, Ala. R. Disc. P., from the practice of law in the State of Alabama by the Disciplinary Commission of the Alabama State Bar, effective January 11, 2018, for failing to respond to formal requests for a written response concerning a disciplinary matter. Harr subsequently submitted a written response and petitioned for dissolution of the summary suspension. The Disciplinary Commission granted the petition and ordered that the summary suspension be dissolved on January 24, 2018.
1/11/2018
Suspended
Lafayette attorney Roland Lewis Sledge was interimly suspended from the practice of law in the State of Alabama pursuant to Rules 8(c) and 20(a), Ala. R. Disc. P., by order…
Read more »
Date: 1/11/2018
Discipline Imposed: Suspended
Description:
Lafayette attorney Roland Lewis Sledge was interimly suspended from the practice of law in the State of Alabama pursuant to Rules 8(c) and 20(a), Ala. R. Disc. P., by order of the Disciplinary Commission of the Alabama State Bar, effective January 11, 2018. The Disciplinary Commission’s order was based on a petition filed by the Office of General Counsel evidencing Sledge’s arrest for one count of arson in the second degree. Sledge was previously arrested and released on bond in an unrelated matter involving Sledge’s actions in a conservatorship proceeding. Because Sledge was arrested and charged with an additional offense, his bond was revoked. [Rule 20(a), Pet. No. 2018-38]
1/11/2018
Suspended
Tuscumbia attorney William Jordan Underwood was interimly suspended from the practice of law in the State of Alabama pursuant to Rules 8(c) and 20(a), Ala. R. Disc. P., by order…
Read more »
Date: 1/11/2018
Discipline Imposed: Suspended
Description:
Tuscumbia attorney William Jordan Underwood was interimly suspended from the practice of law in the State of Alabama pursuant to Rules 8(c) and 20(a), Ala. R. Disc. P., by order of the Disciplinary Commission of the Alabama State Bar, effective January 11, 2018. The Disciplinary Commission’s order was based on a petition filed by the Office of General Counsel evidencing Underwood’s indictment for Bribery of a Juror.
1/11/2018
Suspended
Mobile attorney Steven Lamar Terry was summarily suspended from the practice of law in the State of Alabama pursuant to Rules 8(c) and 20(a), Ala. R. Disc. P., by order…
Read more »
Date: 1/11/2018
Discipline Imposed: Suspended
Description:
Mobile attorney Steven Lamar Terry was summarily suspended from the practice of law in the State of Alabama pursuant to Rules 8(c) and 20(a), Ala. R. Disc. P., by order of the Disciplinary Commission of the Alabama State Bar, effective January 11, 2018. The Disciplinary Commission’s order was based on a petition filed by the Office of General Counsel evidencing Terry’s refusal to respond to a request for information concerning a disciplinary matter. After receiving a copy of the suspension order, Terry submitted his response on January 23, 2018 and filed a petition to dissolve the summary suspension. Thereafter, on January 29, 2018, the Disciplinary Commission entered an order dissolving the summary suspension.
1/9/2018
Inactive
Birmingham attorney, Thomas Lawson Selden, was transferred to inactive status effective January 9, 2018, by Order of the Supreme Court of Alabama. The Supreme Court entered its Order based upon…
Read more »
Date: 1/9/2018
Discipline Imposed: Inactive
Description:
Birmingham attorney, Thomas Lawson Selden, was transferred to inactive status effective January 9, 2018, by Order of the Supreme Court of Alabama. The Supreme Court entered its Order based upon the January 9, 2018 Order of Panel III of the Disciplinary Board of the Alabama State Bar in response to Selden’s petition submitted to the Office of General Counsel requesting he be transferred to inactive status.
1/2/2018
Suspended
Greenville attorney Heather Leigh Friday Boone was summarily suspended pursuant to Rule 20a, Ala. R. Disc. P., from the practice of law in the State of Alabama by the Supreme…
Read more »
Date: 1/2/2018
Discipline Imposed: Suspended
Description:
Greenville attorney Heather Leigh Friday Boone was summarily suspended pursuant to Rule 20a, Ala. R. Disc. P., from the practice of law in the State of Alabama by the Supreme Court of Alabama, effective January 2, 2018. The Supreme Court entered its order based upon the Disciplinary Commission’s order that Boone be summarily suspended for failing to respond to formal requests concerning a disciplinary matter.
12/20/2017
Disbarred
An attorney was disbarred and excluded from the practice of law in the State of Alabama effective December 20, 2017, by order of the Alabama Supreme Court subject to the…
Read more »
Date: 12/20/2017
Discipline Imposed: Disbarred
Description:
An attorney was disbarred and excluded from the practice of law in the State of Alabama effective December 20, 2017, by order of the Alabama Supreme Court subject to the terms and conditions of the December 20, 2017, order entered by the Disciplinary Board of the Alabama State Bar based on the attorney's Consent to Disbarment submitted December 18, 2017, wherein the attorney consented to disbarment based upon misappropriation of client funds. Rule 23a, Ala. R. Disc. P.
12/12/2017
Suspended
Mobile attorney Woodrow Eugene Howard, III was reinstated to the practice of law in the State of Alabama effective December 12, 2017, and is required to meet certain conditions outlined…
Read more »
Date: 12/12/2017
Discipline Imposed: Suspended
Description:
Mobile attorney Woodrow Eugene Howard, III was reinstated to the practice of law in the State of Alabama effective December 12, 2017, and is required to meet certain conditions outlined in the order. The Supreme Court of Alabama entered an order January 3, 2018 noting Howard’s reinstatement to the practice of law and inclusion on the official roster of attorneys. The Supreme Court’s order was based upon the decision of the Disciplinary Commission of the Alabama State Bar accepting Howard’s Conditional Guilty Plea and granting the reinstatement filed by Howard on November 20, 2017. [Rule 20(a), Pet. No. 2017-66, ASB 2015-1758, and ASB 2016-1161]
12/12/2017
Suspended
An Attorney was suspended from the practice of law in Alabama for a period of one (1) year and ninety (90) days by the Disciplinary Commission of the Alabama State…
Read more »
Date: 12/12/2017
Discipline Imposed: Suspended
Description:
An Attorney was suspended from the practice of law in Alabama for a period of one (1) year and ninety (90) days by the Disciplinary Commission of the Alabama State Bar. The attorney will serve the ninety-day suspension beginning December 12, 2017, while the one-year suspension will be held in abeyance at which time the attorney will be placed on probation, with conditions, for the two-year period. On January 3, 2018, the Supreme Court of Alabama entered a notation of the attorney’s suspension. The Supreme Court entered its notation based upon the Disciplinary Commission’s acceptance of the attorney’s conditional guilty plea, wherein the attorney pleaded guilty to violating Rules 1.4(a), 1.4(b), 8.4(a), and 8.4(g), Ala. R. Prof. C. the attorney admitted he failed to comply with reasonable requests for information from his clients and failed to explain the matter to the extent reasonably necessary to permit the clients to make an informed decision regarding his representation.
12/12/2017
Suspended
Mobile attorney Woodrow Eugene Howard, III was reinstated to the practice of law in the State of Alabama effective December 12, 2017, and is required to meet certain conditions outlined…
Read more »
Date: 12/12/2017
Discipline Imposed: Suspended
Description:
Mobile attorney Woodrow Eugene Howard, III was reinstated to the practice of law in the State of Alabama effective December 12, 2017, and is required to meet certain conditions outlined in the order. The Supreme Court of Alabama entered an order January 3, 2018 noting Howard’s reinstatement to the practice of law and inclusion on the official roster of attorneys. The Supreme Court’s order was based upon the decision of the Disciplinary Commission of the Alabama State Bar accepting Howard’s Conditional Guilty Plea and granting the reinstatement filed by Howard on November 20, 2017. [Rule 20(a), Pet. No. 2017-66, ASB 2015-1758, and ASB 2016-1161]
12/12/2017
Suspended
Mobile attorney Woodrow Eugene Howard, III was reinstated to the practice of law in the State of Alabama effective December 12, 2017, and is required to meet certain conditions outlined…
Read more »
Date: 12/12/2017
Discipline Imposed: Suspended
Description:
Mobile attorney Woodrow Eugene Howard, III was reinstated to the practice of law in the State of Alabama effective December 12, 2017, and is required to meet certain conditions outlined in the order. The Supreme Court of Alabama entered an order January 3, 2018 noting Howard’s reinstatement to the practice of law and inclusion on the official roster of attorneys. The Supreme Court’s order was based upon the decision of the Disciplinary Commission of the Alabama State Bar accepting Howard’s Conditional Guilty Plea and granting the reinstatement filed by Howard on November 20, 2017. [Rule 20(a), Pet. No. 2017-66, ASB 2015-1758, and ASB 2016-1161]
12/12/2017
Public Reprimand With Publication
In December 2017, the Disciplinary Commission determined that an attorney should receive a public reprimand with general publication; serve an additional one year supervised probation pursuant to Rule 21, Ala.…
Read more »
Date: 12/12/2017
Discipline Imposed: Public Reprimand With Publication
Description:
In December 2017, the Disciplinary Commission determined that an attorney should receive a public reprimand with general publication; serve an additional one year supervised probation pursuant to Rule 21, Ala. R. Disc. P.; successfully complete an additional five hours of CLE in both law office practice management and probate and estate planning and provide proof of completion thereof; and pay a $750 administrative fee pursuant to Rule 33, Ala. R. Disc. P., for violating Rules 1.3 and 1.4, Ala. R. Prof. C. The attorney failed to diligently represent the client and failed to reasonably communicate with the client regarding the matter. In one matter, the attorney failed to clearly communicate to her client her role in filing claims with the Veteran’s Administration which caused the client to believe applications were filed, when they were not.
12/11/2017
Private Reprimand
On December 11, 2017, an attorney was issued a private reprimand for violating Rules 7.3, and 8.4(a) and (g), Ala. R. Prof. C. In March of 2016, an accident involving…
Read more »
Date: 12/11/2017
Discipline Imposed: Private Reprimand
Description:
On December 11, 2017, an attorney was issued a private reprimand for violating Rules 7.3, and 8.4(a) and (g), Ala. R. Prof. C. In March of 2016, an accident involving a school bus and a truck that occurred in Florida, wherein several school children were injured. A private investigator employed by the attorney improperly solicited personal injury cases on the attorney’s behalf. The attorney maintained he was unaware of the private investigator’s actions. However, the attorney failed to inquire as to how the private investigator came in contact with the clients. In addition to the private reprimand, the attorney was required to refund all legal fees to the clients.
12/5/2017
Private Reprimand
In December 2017, an attorney received a private reprimand for violating Rules 3.1(a), 3.5(c), 4.4(a) and 8.4(a), and (g), Ala. R. Prof. C. In February, 2017 the Office of General…
Read more »
Date: 12/5/2017
Discipline Imposed: Private Reprimand
Description:
In December 2017, an attorney received a private reprimand for violating Rules 3.1(a), 3.5(c), 4.4(a) and 8.4(a), and (g), Ala. R. Prof. C. In February, 2017 the Office of General Counsel received a complaint filed by opposing counsel in a settlement matter wherein the respondent attorney represented a client who was involved in an automobile accident involving a city employee. The city’s attorney requested an E-verify certification for the respondent attorney’s firm in order to issue the settlement proceeds on behalf of the client. The respondent attorney became angry with the request, accused the city’s attorney of wrongfully withholding settlement funds, and threatened to file suit and include the city’s attorney personally if settlement funds weren’t available for pick up within 45 minutes of the email. In addition, the respondent attorney made other inappropriate statements involving the city attorney’s possible employment issues, bar license and his representation of the city. With the respondent attorney’s conduct in this matter, he violated Rules 3.1(a), 3.5.(c), 4.4(a), 8.4(a), and 8.4(g) by asserting non-meritorious claims and contentions, engaging in conduct intended to disrupt the tribunal, not respecting the rights of third persons, and engaging in conduct adversely reflecting on your fitness to practice law.
12/5/2017
Private Reprimand
In December 2017, an attorney received a private reprimand for violating Rules 8.4(a), and (g), Ala. R. Prof. C. In April, 2016, the respondent attorney self-reported to the Office of…
Read more »
Date: 12/5/2017
Discipline Imposed: Private Reprimand
Description:
In December 2017, an attorney received a private reprimand for violating Rules 8.4(a), and (g), Ala. R. Prof. C. In April, 2016, the respondent attorney self-reported to the Office of General Counsel the attorney was arrested for Possession of Cocaine and Resisting Arrest while in another state for a bachelor party. The respondent attorney reported he struggled with addiction for many years and had been attending classes at a Treatment Center at the time of his arrest. After the arrest, the respondent attorney signed a three (3) year monitoring contract with ALAP, started seeing a therapist, and regularly attended AA meetings. In November, 2016, the respondent attorney provided an update regarding the treatment program and stated he would continue his monitoring program with ALAP. With the respondent attorney’s conduct in this matter, he violated Rules 8.4(a), (b) and (g) by violating a Rule of Professional Conduct, committing a criminal act that reflects adversely on his honesty, trustworthiness or fitness as a lawyer, and engaging in conduct adversely reflecting on his fitness to practice law.