Pridgen, Matter of, 22492

Decision Date05 March 1986
Docket NumberNo. 22492,22492
PartiesIn the Matter of Bill Maurice PRIDGEN, Respondent.
CourtSouth Carolina Supreme Court

Atty. Gen. T. Travis Medlock, Senior Asst. Atty. Gen. Richard B. Kale, Jr., and Staff Atty. Samuel L. Wilkins, Columbia, for complainant.

Bill M. Pridgen, pro se.

PER CURIAM:

This grievance proceeding charges respondent with: (1) engaging in conduct involving dishonesty, fraud, deceit, or misrepresentation in violation of DR 1-102(A)(4); and (2) engaging in conduct prejudicial to the administration of justice or tending to bring the courts or legal profession into disrepute or conduct demonstrating that he is unfit to practice law in violation of DR 1-102(A)(5) & (6) and Paragraph 5(D) of the Rule on Disciplinary Procedure. Respondent consents to a public reprimand and conditionally admits the following facts.

On January 9, 1985, the South Carolina Commission on Continuing Lawyer Competence (CCLC) received a Report of Compliance from respondent stating that he had attended six Continuing Legal Education (CLE) hours during 1984. On April 19, 1985, the Administrative Director for the CCLC sent respondent a letter advising respondent that he was delinquent in reporting a minimum of twelve CLE hours, and that he had sixty days to comply or face automatic suspension. On April 29, 1985, the CCLC received a revised Report of Compliance, signed by respondent under oath, which alleged that respondent had attended the six CLE hours originally reported plus seven CLE hours from a seminar at Horry-Georgetown Technical College held on November 16, 1984. In fact, respondent did not attend the additional seven hours.

Respondent's failure to comply with the mandatory CLE requirements and misrepresentation to the CCLC mandate a public reprimand. Respondent, therefore, stands publicly reprimanded by this Court in accordance with Paragraph 7(A)(4) of the Rule on Disciplinary Procedure.

PUBLIC REPRIMAND.

To continue reading

Request your trial
5 cases
  • Edwards, Matter of
    • United States
    • South Carolina Supreme Court
    • April 2, 1997
    ... ... 391, 350 S.E.2d 922 (1986)(imposing temporary suspension for attorney who knowingly submitted false CLE report). But see In re Pridgen, 288 S.C. 96, ... 341 S.E.2d 376 (1986)(imposing public reprimand for submitting [327 S.C. 160] false CLE report); In re Altman, 287 S.C. 321, 338 ... ...
  • State v. Castineira
    • United States
    • South Carolina Court of Appeals
    • July 17, 2000
  • City of Aiken v. David Michael Koontz, 4094.
    • United States
    • South Carolina Court of Appeals
    • March 20, 2006
  • State v. Truesdale, 3357.
    • United States
    • South Carolina Court of Appeals
    • June 18, 2001
    ... ... § 34-11-60 (1987 & Supp.2000). He appealed and the circuit court ordered the matter remanded for trial, finding there was no evidence Truesdale entered a valid guilty plea. The State ... ...
  • Request a trial to view additional results

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT