Mobile attorney Sonya Alexandrial Ogletree-Bailey is currently disbarred from the practice of law in the State of Alabama. She has received another disbarment, effective November 17, 2022, to run consecutively to her current disbarment from the practice of law. The Supreme Court entered its order based on the Report and Order of the Disciplinary Board of the Alabama State Bar, disbarring Ogletree-Bailey after she was found guilty of violating Rules 1.3 [Diligence], 1.4 [Communication], 1.15(a) [Safekeeping Property], 1.16(d) [Declining or Terminating Representation], 8.1(b) [Bar Admission and Disciplinary Matters], and 8.4 (d) and (g) [Misconduct], Ala. R. Prof. C. In July of 2015, Ogletree-Bailey was hired by a client to represent her in a divorce. According to the contract signed by the client, she was to be charged an hourly rate of $250.00 per hour. The client provided a note that appears to be written by Ogletree-Bailey in which Ogletree-Bailey quotes a fee of $750.00 and a $208.00 filing fee. The note stated that the client must pay $300.00 - $400.00 of the attorney’s fee prior to filing. The client maintained she paid Ogletree-Bailey a total of $958.00 to file the petition for divorce. Ogletree-Bailey failed to place the funds in trust, failed to file the divorce petition, failed to return the client’s calls, and failed to refund any portion of the attorney’s fees or filing fee. Additionally, Ogletree-Bailey failed to respond to multiple requests from the Office of General Counsel of the Alabama State Bar for a written response to the client’s complaint.

On November 14, 2022, the Disciplinary Commission of the Alabama State Bar issued a private reprimand to an attorney for violating Rules 8.1(b) [Bar Admission and Disciplinary Matters] and 8.4(g) [Misconduct], Alabama Rules of Professional Conduct. The attorney was the closing attorney for a client who purchased a home in June 2021, In January 2022, the client received a tax notice indicating that the 2021 property taxes were overdue. The client contended that it was the 2020 property tax that was not paid. However, the tax records submitted by the client showed that the property tax notice was for 2021 and would not have been due until October 1, 2021. The client contacted the attorney and was informed the taxes would be paid. After the client filed a bar complaint, the attorney failed to submit a timely written response despite multiple requests to do so.

The Alabama Supreme Court issued an order suspending Birmingham attorney Trenton Rogers Garmon from the practice of law in the State of Alabama for a period of ninety-one (91) days, effective November 9, 2022. The suspension order was based on the Conditional Guilty Plea submitted by Garmon, in which Garmon pled guilty to violating Rules 8.4(b) and (g) [Misconduct] Alabama Rules of Professional Conduct. In ASB Nos. 2019-797 and 2020-502, Garmon was arrested on or about October 25, 2019, for Public Intoxication and Disorderly Conduct. After being found guilty of both offenses, Garmon appealed the matters to Circuit Court. On March 14, 2022, Garmon pled guilty to both offenses. Garmon was arrested on April 30, 2020, in Gainesville, FL for Disorderly Intoxication and Resisting Officer without Violence. Garmon was given deferred prosecution and placed on probation with fines and conditions for six months. After completing deferred prosecution, the charges against Garmon were nolle prossed. Garmon pled no contest to a criminal charge of Stalking in Lee County Florida on July 12, 2021. The charge was related to Garmon’s harassment of his ex-wife. Garmon was granted probation for one year with a number of conditions to satisfy.

The Alabama Supreme Court issued an order suspending Birmingham attorney Trenton Rogers Garmon from the practice of law in the State of Alabama for a period of ninety-one (91) days, effective November 9, 2022. The suspension order was based on the Conditional Guilty Plea submitted by Garmon, in which Garmon pled guilty to violating Rules 8.4(b) and (g) [Misconduct] Alabama Rules of Professional Conduct. In ASB Nos. 2019-797 and 2020-502, Garmon was arrested on or about October 25, 2019, for Public Intoxication and Disorderly Conduct. After being found guilty of both offenses, Garmon appealed the matters to Circuit Court. On March 14, 2022, Garmon pled guilty to both offenses. Garmon was arrested on April 30, 2020, in Gainesville, FL for Disorderly Intoxication and Resisting Officer without Violence. Garmon was given deferred prosecution and placed on probation with fines and conditions for six months. After completing deferred prosecution, the charges against Garmon were nolle prossed. Garmon pled no contest to a criminal charge of Stalking in Lee County Florida on July 12, 2021. The charge was related to Garmon’s harassment of his ex-wife. Garmon was granted probation for one year with a number of conditions to satisfy.

On November 4, 2022, the Disciplinary Commission of the Alabama State Bar issued a public reprimand without general publication to Monica Gay Mann, for violating Rules 1.3 [Diligence], 1.4 [Communication], 8.1(b) [Bar Admission and Disciplinary Matter], and 8.4(g) [Misconduct], Alabama Rules of Professional Conduct. In March 2020, Mann was retained to represent a client in a quiet title action for $503. After executing an “Affidavit of Quiet Title” the client sent it to Mann on March 20, 2020. The client heard nothing further from Mann. On August 7, 2020, the client telephoned Mann and was informed that the necessary paperwork was on file and the next step would require a judge to approve or deny the advertisement to be placed in the paper. The client heard nothing further from Mann until October 12, 2020, when she asked the client to have a third party sign an “heirship affidavit”. The client had the affidavit signed, notarized, and returned. The client later contacted Mann’s office on November 6, 2020 and learned that no action had been taken. In April 2021, the client requested Mann return her original deed. Mann failed to respond, and the client filed a bar complaint.

On July 13, 2022, the Disciplinary Commission of the Alabama State Bar issued a public reprimand without general publication to an Alabaster attorney for violating Alabama Rules of Professional Conduct, Rules 1.3 [Diligence]; 1.4 [Communication]; 3.2 [Expediting Litigation]; 8.1 [Bar Admission and Disciplinary Matters]; and, 8.4 [Misconduct]. On December 2, 2021, the Office of General Counsel (“OGC”) received from a United States Magistrate Judge, United States District Court for the Middle District of Alabama, motions and orders in a federal court action. The motions and orders detailed that the matter was dismissed with prejudice due to the attorney’s failure to submit documents to the Court as ordered, attorney’s failure to respond to opposing counsel and attorney’s failure to respond to the Defendant’s motion to dismiss. On December 9, 2021, and March 3, 2022, the Alabama State Bar Office of General Counsel (“OGC”) corresponded to the attorney requesting a response in the matter be submitted. The attorney failed or refused to respond to OGC. On March 24, 2022, the attorney was directed to file a response in the matter within seven (7) days. The attorney failed or refused to respond to the directive. On March 29, 2022, the attorney confirmed with OGC of receipt of an email memorializing the phone conversation of March 24, 2022, yet still failed or refused to submit a response in the matter. On April 8, 2022, attorney’s response was finally received by the OGC. Attorney admitted a misunderstanding of the status of the pending federal case and that electronic notices were received by attorney but attorney failed to read the same, ultimately resulting in the matter being dismissed with prejudice.

On November 4, 2022, the Disciplinary Commission of the Alabama State Bar issued a public reprimand without general publication to, Burton Wheeler Newsome for violating Rules 8.4 (a), (d) and (g) [Misconduct], Alabama Rules of Professional Conduct. In January 2015, Newsome sued attorney Clark A. Cooper, John W. Bullock, attorney Claiborne Seier, and Don Gottier alleging that the defendants combined to have him arrested on a false charge with the intent of damaging his reputation and law practice. The court ultimately entered judgments in favor of the defendants and awarded the defendants attorney fees and costs under the Alabama Litigation Accountability Act. The Supreme Court upheld the award against Newsome finding that he subjected the defendants to protracted litigation even though his claims were without “substantial justification”.

Montgomery attorney, Kynesha L. Adams-Jones was issued a public reprimand with general publication on November 4, 2022, as ordered by the Disciplinary Commission of the Alabama State Bar, for violating Rules 1.15 [Safekeeping] and 8.4(g) [Misconduct], Alabama Rules of Professional Conduct. On or about May 25, 2021, the Office of General Counsel received an insufficient funds notice from Wells Fargo Bank regarding Adam-Jones’ trust account. The notice indicated the trust account was overdrawn as a result of a $300 online transfer of funds. This was the third overdraft notification received in the Office of General Counsel concerning Adam-Jones’ trust account since 2018. Upon submission of the unredacted trust account statements, Adam-Jones admitted that she had been improperly depositing earned fees and personal funds into her trust account. Adams-Jones admitted to making numerous personal payments directly from her trust account. Adam-Jones also admitted to failing to maintain a general ledger as required by Rule 1.15(e) [Safekeeping], Alabama Rules of Professional Conduct. A review of Adam-Jones trust account did not reveal any indication of misappropriation of client funds.

On September 21, 2022, the Disciplinary Commission of the Alabama State Bar issued a private reprimand to an attorney for violating Rules Rule 1.5 [Fees], and 1.15 [Safekeeping], Alabama Rules of Professional Conduct. The attorney was hired in March 2020 to represent a client after the client was served with an administrative complaint by the Alabama Home Builder Licensure Board. The attorney charged a $5,000 retainer. The attorney failed to specify the hourly rate at which the client would be charged in the letter of engagement. In addition, the attorney failed to issue any invoices to the client showing how the retainer was billed. The attorney also failed to place the retainers in his trust account. After the client concluded representation, the attorney failed to render a full accounting to the client upon request.

Illinois, attorney Matthew Ryan McCormick, who is also licensed in the State of Alabama, was ordered by the Disciplinary Board of the Alabama State Bar, to receive reciprocal discipline of a two-year suspension from the practice of law in the State of Alabama, effective October 25, 2022, pursuant to Rule 25, Alabama Rules of Disciplinary Procedure. McCormick was found guilty of failing to diligently represent his clients, for failing to adequately communicate with his clients and for engaging in dishonest and misleading conduct.

On September 16, 2022, the Disciplinary Commission of the Alabama State Bar issued a private reprimand to an attorney for violating Rules Rule 1.3 [Diligence], 1.4 [Communication], 1.15 [Safekeeping], 1.16(d) [Declining and Terminating Representation], 8.4(g) [Misconduct], Alabama Rules of Professional Conduct. The attorney was hired in February 2021, by a client to represent them in a divorce proceeding. The client paid a $3,000 retainer to be billed at $250 per hour. The attorney filed the complaint and service on the defendant was obtained in April 2021. Thereafter, the attorney took no further action in the matter despite repeated promises to the client. In April 2022, the client terminated the attorney and filed a Bar complaint. The attorney apologized, stating they had been in an accident and offered to complete the case without charging additional fees. The client declined the offer. The attorney refunded the client the unearned fee.

Montgomery attorney Michael Dickerson Fascell Winter, was transferred to Inactive Status, effective October 4, 2022. The Supreme Court entered a notation on the Supreme Court of Alabama’s Roll of Attorneys based upon the October 4, 2022, Order of the Disciplinary Board of the Alabama State Bar, in response to Winter’s petition filed with the Office of General Counsel requesting he be transferred to inactive status.

Oklahoma attorney James Darrell Reedy was disbarred from the practice of law in the State of Alabama, effective October 3, 2022. The Supreme Court entered its order based on the order of the Disciplinary Commission of the Alabama State Bar, disbarring Reedy he was convicted of manslaughter in the Baldwin County Circuit Court on March 21, 2018.

Tuscaloosa attorney, Albert Jones, was issued a public reprimand without general publication for violating Rules 1.2 [Scope of Representation], 1.4 [Communication], and 8.4(g) [Misconduct], Alabama Rules of Professional Conduct. On or about August 11, 2015, Jones was hired to represent an individual on a personal injury case after the individual slipped and fell at a doctor’s office. At the time Jones was hired, the client was in a Chapter 13 Bankruptcy proceeding. After obtaining permission to represent the client on the personal injury claim from the bankruptcy court, Jones filed suit on the client’s behalf. Thereafter, Jones failed to adequately and timely communicate with the client regarding the status of her case. On or about August 17, 2019, the client was contacted by Medicare requesting reimbursement as a result of the settlement of her personal injury case. That same day, the client contacted Jones and Jones informed her that her case had not been settled. Jones instructed the client to ignore the letter from Medicare. However, the next day, the client contacted the Tuscaloosa Circuit Court and obtained a copy of a “Joint Notice of Settlement” entered between the parties in her case on May 30, 2019. Jones subsequently admitted that he settled the client’s case because he believed she was going to lose her case on summary judgment. Jones subsequently informed the investigator that he believed he had obtained the client’s permission to settle the case. However, Jones was unable to produce any proof that he had obtained the client’s permission or that of the Bankruptcy Court to settle the case.