In re Murdaugh

• Decision Date: 12 July 2022
• Docket Number: Appellate Case No. 2022-000812
• Citation: 437 S.C. 15,875 S.E.2d 625 (Mem)
• Parties: In the MATTER OF Richard Alexander MURDAUGH, Respondent.
• Court: South Carolina Supreme Court

437 S.C. 15

875 S.E.2d 625 (Mem)

In the MATTER OF Richard Alexander MURDAUGH, Respondent.

Appellate Case No. 2022-000812

Supreme Court of South Carolina.

July 12, 2022

ORDER

We suspended Respondent Richard Alexander Murdaugh from the practice of law on September 8, 2021. In re Murdaugh , 434 S.C. 233, 863 S.E.2d 335 (2021). In the intervening months, Respondent has been indicted on more than eighty criminal charges arising from various ongoing investigations. Additionally, Respondent has admitted in various court proceedings and filings that he engaged in financial misconduct involving theft of money from his former law firm; that he solicited his own murder to defraud his life insurance carrier; and that he is liable for the theft of $4,305,000 in settlement funds.¹ Based on these admissions, we issued an order directing Respondent to personally appear before this Court on June 22, 2022, to present legal argument on the question of whether he should be disbarred from the practice of law. We subsequently canceled that hearing after Respondent filed an affidavit waiving all rights to a hearing and stating he did not contest the Court's "authority and decision" to disbar him from the practice of law. In doing so, we noted a formal decision as to disbarment would follow.

Disbarment is among the most serious sanctions this Court can impose for unethical conduct committed by members of the legal profession. The purpose of disbarring an attorney "is to remove from the profession a person whose misconduct has proved him unfit to be entrusted with the duties and responsibilities belonging to the office of an attorney, and thus to protect the public and those charged with the administration of justice." In re Kennedy , 254 S.C. 463, 465, 176 S.E.2d 125, 126 (1970).

Respondent concedes that disbarment is warranted in light of his admitted professional misconduct. However, our decision today turns not on Respondent's concession, but rather derives from our constitutional authority and duty to protect the public from attorneys who are not fit to practice law. See In re Barker , 352 S.C. 71, 74, 572 S.E.2d 460, 462 (2002) ("The authority to discipline attorneys and the manner in which discipline is given rests entirely with this Court."). Indeed, we take this step today based on our ability to conclude from the public record that Respondent's untruthfulness and misconduct resulted in significant harm to clients and demands his removal from the practice of law.

Based on his admitted reprehensible misconduct, we hereby disbar Respondent Richard Alexander Murdaugh from the practice of law in South Carolina. In removing Respondent from the legal profession, we note his misconduct remains under investigation by the Office of Disciplinary Counsel (ODC), and our decision today in no way concludes, limits, restricts, or otherwise impacts the ongoing ODC investigation, which we trust...