In Re Escoffery., 758.

Decision Date16 June 1939
Docket NumberNo. 758.,758.
Citation3 S.E.2d 425
CourtNorth Carolina Supreme Court
PartiesIn re ESCOFFERY.

216 N.C. 19

Appeal from Superior Court, Durham County; Marshall T. Spears, Judge.

Proceeding by the North Carolina State Bar for disbarment of Phillip A. Escoffery, a practicing attorney. From a judgment disbarring respondent from the practice of law, he appeals.

No error.

R. O. Everett, of Durham, for appellant.

B. W. Parham, of Oxford, and Edward L. Cannon, of Durham, for appellee North Carolina State Bar.

SCHENCK, Justice.

This was a proceeding prosecuted by The North Carolina State Bar against Phillip A. Escoffery, a practicing attorney of North Carolina, for the disbarment of the said respondent, under Chapter 210, Public Laws 1933, § 11 et seq., and acts amendatory thereof. N. C. Code of 1935 (Mich-ie) § 215(11) et seq.

The respondent was duly furnished with a statement of the charges against him to which statement he filed answer, and the cause came on to be heard by a Trial Committee, which committee heard the evidence, found the facts and concluded as a matter of law that the respondent was "guilty of detention, without bona fide claim thereto, of moneys collected in the capacity of attorney, " and was "guilty of, wilful deceit and fraud and unprofessional conduct, and has violated the canons of ethics of The North Carolina State Bar" and recommended "that the respondent be disbarred from the practice of law in the State of North Carolina."

The' respondent duly excepted to the findings of fact and conclusions of law p£ the Trial Committee, and appealed to the Council of The North Carolina State Bar for trial upon issues tendered.

The cause came on for hearing before the Council of The North Carolina State Bar, at a regular quarterly meeting, upon report of the Trial Committee. After considering the entire record, and hearing counsel, the Council adopted the following resolution:

"Resolved, that the findings of fact and conclusions of law of the Trial Committee be affirmed and that the respondent Phillip A. Escoffery be and he is hereby disbarred from the practice of law in the State of North Carolina, " and thereupon "ordered, adjudged and decreed that the said Phillip A. Escoffery be and he is hereby disbarred from the practice of law in the State of North Carolina."

To the foregoing judgment, signed by Chas. G. Rose, President of The North Carolina State Bar, the respondent excepted and appealed to the Superior Court.

The record was duly transmitted to the Superior Court of Durham County, and thecause came on for hearing before Spears, J., at the October Term, 1938, and was tried before a jury upon the following issues:

"1. Did Phillip A. Escoffery, in his capacity as attorney at law, receive from his client Robert Lee Jeffers, the sum of $350.-00, and detain without a bona fide claim thereto the said sum or any part thereof?

"2. Did Phillip A. Escoffery, in his capacity as attorney at law, receive from his client, Robert Lee Jeffers, the sum of $3.75 and detain without a bona fide claim thereto the said sum?

"3. Was Phillip A. Escoffery guilty of any wilful deceit or fraud involving unprofessional conduct in his dealings with his client, Robert Lee Jeffers?"

The jury answered each of the issues in the affirmative. Whereupon the Court entered judgment "that the respondent Phillip A. Escoffery be and he is hereby disbarred from the practice of law in the State of North Carolina." From this judgment the respondent appealed to the Supreme Court.

The respondent in this Court entered a demurrer ore tenus to the statement of charges upon which he was tried for that such statement failed to state facts sufficient to constitute the cause or causes of action indicated by the issues submitted. This demurrer cannot be sustained.

Relative to the $350 mentioned in the first issue the statement of charges alleges, inter alia, "that the said...

To continue reading

Request your trial
3 cases
  • Query v. Gate City Life Ins. Co, 385.
    • United States
    • North Carolina Supreme Court
    • October 30, 1940
    ...The imputed error "in signing the judgment" presents only the question whether error appears on the face of the record. In re Escoffery, 216 N.C. 19, 3 S.E.2d 425; Moreland v. Wamboldt, 208 N.C. 35, 179 S.E. 9; Dixon v. Osborne, 201 N.C. 489, 160 S.E. 579; Smith v. Mineral Co., 217 N.C. 346......
  • Lea v. Bridgeman, 165.
    • United States
    • North Carolina Supreme Court
    • March 3, 1948
    ...is a title to the whole property absolutely. 31 C.J.S., Estates, § 8. Manifestly, the judgment is supported by the verdict. In Re Escoffery, 216 N.C. 19, 3 S.E.2d 425. It follows that the judgment must be affirmed. ...
  • In re Escoffery
    • United States
    • North Carolina Supreme Court
    • June 16, 1939
    ...3 S.E.2d 425 216 N.C. 19 In re ESCOFFERY. No. 758.Supreme Court of North CarolinaJune 16, 1939 ...          R ... O. Everett, of Durham, for appellant ...          B ... W. Parham, of Oxford, and Edward L. Cannon, of Durham, for ... appellee North Carolina State Bar ...          SCHENCK, ... ...

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