On January 7, 2013, an attorney received a private reprimand for violations of Rules 1.9 and 8.3(a), Ala. R. Prof. C. The respondent attorney engaged in conversations with individuals concerning a possible civil action against another individual. However, the individuals did not follow up with the respondent attorney about possible representation. Several months later, the respondent attorney appeared in court on behalf of the defendant.

An attorney was disbarred from the practice of law in the State of Alabama, pursurant to Rule 23, Ala. R. Disc. P., effective January 1, 2013, by order of the Alabama Supreme Court. The Supreme Court entered its order based upon the decision of the Disciplinary Board of the Alabama State Bar accepting the attorney's consent to disbarment, in which he acknowledged that there were currently pending investigations into his ethical conduct as a lawyer involving allegations of multiple violations of the Alabama Rules of Professional Conduct which, if proven, would be grounds for disbarment. The attorney acknowledged engaging in conduct which violated the Alabama Rules of Professional Conduct.

The Supreme Court of Alabama adopted the order of the Alabama State Bar Disciplinary Board, Panel I, disbarring an attorney from the practice of law in the State of Alabama effective December 26, 2012. The disbarment was entered as reciprocal discipline regarding the June 13, 2011, revocation of the attorney's license to practice law in another state. Rule 25 - Reciprocal Rules violated:1.15(a), 1.15(c)(4), 1.15(d), 1.15(f), 8.4(b) & 8.4(c)

An attorney was suspended from the practice of law in the State of Alabama for a period of 180 days, by Order of the Supreme Court of Alabama, effective December 19, 2012. The Supreme Court entered its order based upon the Disciplinary Commission’s acceptance of the attorney's Conditional Guilty Plea, wherein he pled guilty to violating Rules 1.3, 1.15(a), 1.15(b), 1.15(g), 8.4(a) and 8.4(g), Ala. R. Prof. C. The attorney was retained to probate the estate of her client’s father for a flat fee of $7,600.00. A hearing was scheduled in the matter; however, the attorney failed to appear at the hearing and the court ruled against the client and taxed costs against her. The client had also retained the attorney to represent him involving the eviction of a tenant from one of the client’s rental properties. The attorney obtained a default judgment for past due rent, and later obtained a garnishment on the tenant’s wages. The attorney had the payments issued directly to her. The attorney cashed the garnishment checks, but failed to deposit the checks into a trust account. Additionally, the attorney failed to maintain an IOLTA account as required by the Alabama Rules of Professional Conduct, and failed to remit some of the garnishment payments to the client. In addition to receiving the 180 day suspension, the attorney has been ordered to pay restitution in the amount of $500.00 to the complainant.

An attorney was disbarred from the practice of law in the State of Alabama by order of the Alabama Supreme Court effective December 18, 2012. The Supreme Court entered its order based upon the decision of the Disciplinary Board, Panel I, of the Alabama State Bar wherein the attorney was found guilty of violating Rules 1.1, 1.3, 1.4(a), 1.4(b), 1.5(a), 1.16(d), 8.1(b), and 8.4 (a), (c) and (g), Ala. R. Prof. C.
After accepting clients’ cases, the attorney did little or no work in the matters and would not communicate with the clients.

On 12/14/12, an attorney received a private reprimand for violating Rule 8.4(g), Ala. R. Prof. C. The attorney filed a notice of appearance in a criminal case and on the morning of pre-trial, the attorney electronically filed a motion to continue the pre-trial & the trial. The motion to continue was denied, but the attorney failed to appear at pre-trial due to a court appearance in another county. The court instructed the attorney to appear in court immediately upon the conclusion of the court appearance in the other county, but the attorney failed to appear. The following day, the attorney was contacted by the court & advised to appear in court that day. At 3:55 p.m. the attorney appeared in court & it was determined that the attorney had not followed the conflict resolution rule. In another matter the attorney filed a motion to continue a probation revocation hearing which was scheduled for the following day at 8:45 a.m. The reasons stated in the motion to continue were that the attorney had just been retained to represent the client & needed additional time to prepare for the hearing, & had a conflict with the hearing date in that he was scheduled to appear in court in another state in another matter. At the time of filing the motion to continue, the attorney was not licensed to practice law in the other state, & no pro hac vice application had been filed.

The attorney was suspended in AL by order of the AL Supreme Ct for a period of 91days effective 12/10/12. The Supreme Ct entered its order based on the decision of Disc. Board, Panel III, of the ASB wherein the attorney was found guilty of violating Rules 1.8(a), 1.8(b), 8.4(a) & (g) Ala. R. Prof. C. The attorney was also ordered to make restitution to the client in the amount of $989.13. The attorney was retained to represent a client in several matters, including a divorce, options resulting from the client’s financial difficulties and filing suit against individuals who owed her money. The client disclosed to the attorney personal financial information such as assets, debts, creditors, & real property she owned, for which she was in arrears on both the 1sr & 2nd mortgages. The attorney was also made aware that the client had cognitive impairments due to an accident in which she suffered closed-head injuries. The attorney took advantage of his client, made sexual advances toward her, and had a sexual relationship with her. Furthermore, the attorney gained knowledge about his client’s financial dilemma, the availability of her only real asset & her need to sell that asset & used this information to her disadvantage. The attorney entered into a business transaction with the client in which the terms were not fair & reasonable nor transmitted in writing to the client & the client was not provided an opportunity to seek the advice of independent counsel nor did she consent in writing to waive the attorney’s conflict.

On November 21, 2012, an attorney received a private reprimand for violations of Rules 1.15(a), 1.15(g), and 8.4(c), Ala. R. Prof. C. On November 2, 2012, the Disciplinary Commission accepted the respondent attorney’s conditional guilty plea to these rules violations. From January of 2007 until September of 2008, the respondent attorney had a law partner. The law firm was dissolved due to a dispute over the law firm’s finances. During the partnership, the respondent attorney received payments for legal services totaling approximately $53,400.00. Although the respondent attorney and his law partner agreed to share income equally, the respondent attorney converted the fees for his own personal use and did not disclose the income to his law partner. The respondent attorney’s failure to share the income as originally agreed with his law partner and his not placing the disputed fees into the trust account violated Rules 1.15(a), 1.15(g), and 8.4(c), Ala. R. Prof. C.

On November 21, 2012, an attorney received a private reprimand for violations of Rules 1.3 and 1.4(a), Ala. R. Prof. C. In 2007, the respondent attorney represented a client in a construction contract dispute. The attorney filed the civil complaint on March 29, 2007. On December 12, 2007, the judge allowed the attorney ten days to file a default judgment. The attorney claimed she did not see this order. The case was dismissed on July 30, 2008, for her failure to prosecute. The respondent attorney’s client requested a refund of the $3,500.00 fee he paid her to represent him in this matter. However, she did not refund the $3,500.00 until the Bar grievance was filed against her. The respondent attorney’s failure to comply with the judge’s order regarding the filing of the motion for default judgment violated Rule 1.3, Ala. R. Prof. C. Her conduct also violated Rule 1.4(a), Ala. R. Prof. C., because she failed to meet with her client, discuss his case, and keep him advised as to its status.

In 2013 the Supreme Court of Alabama affirmed the suspension of an attorney for a period of ninety (90) days retroactive to November 17, 2012, the date the attorney completed his previously ordered six-month suspension. In 2013 the Disciplinary Commission of the Alabama State Bar accepted the attorney's conditional guilty plea to the following: in one case, the attoreny violated Rules 1.3, 1.4(a) 1.4(b), 3.2, 8.4(a), 8.4(c), 8.4(d), and 8.4(g), Ala. R. Prof. C., by failing or refusing to diligently protect his clients’ interests in their bankruptcy matter and by failing to adequately explain the bankruptcy procedures to his clients.

In 2013, the Supreme Court of Alabama affirmed the suspension of an attorney, for a period of ninety (90) days retroactive to November 17, 2012, the date the attorney completed his previously ordered six-month suspension. In 2013, the Disciplinary Commission of the Alabama State Bar accepted the attoreny's conditional guilty plea to the following: in one matter the attorney violated Rules 1.3 and 1.4(a), Ala. R. Prof. C., by failing to diligently pursue his client’s uncontested divorce case and by failing to adequately communicate with his client;

In 2013, the Supreme Court of Alabama affirmed the suspension of an attorney, for a period of ninety (90) days retroactive to November 17, 2012, the date the attorney completed his previously ordered six-month suspension. In April 2013, the Disciplinary Commission of the Alabama State Bar accepted the attorney's conditional guilty plea to the following: in one case, the attorney violated Rules 1.3 and 1.4(b), Ala. R. Prof. C., by failing to diligently protect his client’s interests in her bankruptcy matter and by failing to adequately explain the bankruptcy procedures to his client.

On November 15, 2012, an attorney received a private reprimand for a violation of Rule 5.5(a), Ala. R. Prof. C. On July 7, 2011, the respondent attorney’s license to practice law in Alabama was suspended for a period of one year. After the effective date of her suspension, the respondent attorney opened a consulting firm based in another state. On the respondent attorney’s website, she stated that she was a practicing attorney. As of the date of this reprimand, the respondent attorney’s license to practice law in Alabama had not been reinstated. The statement on the respondent attorney’s website indicating that she was licensed to practice law was misleading and as a result, violated Rule 5.5(a), Ala. R. Prof. C.

In November of 2012, an attorney received a private reprimand for a violation of Rule 8.4(d), Ala. R. Prof. C. In October 2012, Panel I of the Disciplinary Board of the Alabama State Bar entered an order accepting the respondent attorney’s conditional guilty plea. In November 1998, a Sheriff communicated to the respondent attorney certain criminal history information relating to whether convicted felons had engaged in criminal conduct and voted illegally by absentee ballot in the County Sheriff’s election, and the timing of the communication could imply an intent to use the information in a judicial proceeding, instead of a criminal proceeding. As a result of the conduct described above, and following a plea of not guilty, the respondent attorney was found guilty in the U.S. District Court, Northern District of Alabama of violating 18 U.S.C. § 641 and 18 U.S.C. § 371, Class A misdemeanors.

The attorney received a public reprimand without general publication on 11/2/12, for a violation of Rules 1.12, Ala. R. Prof C. The attorney, as one of the attorneys with the law firm, met with a group of coal miners in October of 2010 to review documents that had to be signed in order for them to participate in the settlement of a class action case. The attorney assisted in explaining to at least one class action plaintiff the contents of the documents he was signing, the legal effect of the documents, and the effect on his case if he declined to sign the documents.Prior to joining the law firm, the attorney previously served as a judge in the underlying civil action that was the subject of the October 2010 meeting. Although the attorney could not and did not share in any of the fees received by the law firm, and never made an appearance as an attorney in the case, he violated Rule 1.12, Ala. R. Prof. C., by participating in a matter wherein he had previously participated personally and substantially as a judge.