Powell, Matter of, No. 24539

CourtUnited States State Supreme Court of South Carolina
Writing for the CourtPER CURIAM
Citation478 S.E.2d 685,325 S.C. 21
PartiesIn the Matter of W. Keith POWELL, Respondent.
Docket NumberNo. 24539
Decision Date02 December 1996

Page 685

478 S.E.2d 685
325 S.C. 21
In the Matter of W. Keith POWELL, Respondent.
No. 24539.
Supreme Court of South Carolina.
Submitted Oct. 29, 1996.
Decided Dec. 2, 1996.

Attorney General Charles Molony Condon and Assistant Deputy General J. Emory Smith, Jr., Columbia, for complainant.

W. Keith Powell, North Myrtle Beach, pro se.

PER CURIAM:

In this attorney grievance proceeding, respondent admits that he has committed ethical violations and consents to a public reprimand.

Page 686

We accept respondent's admission and publicly reprimand him.

The ethical violations committed by respondent arose out of his representation of two clients in the purchase of a lot and mobile home. Although the closing took place on or about May 13, 1993, respondent admits that he did not file the clients' application for a certificate of title to the mobile home until on or about January 17, 1995. He further admits that, without authorization, he signed the clients' names on the application form and notarized the same.

Respondent has violated Rule 1.3 of the Rules of Professional Conduct contained in Rule 407, SCACR, by failing to act with reasonable diligence and promptness in representing these clients. Additionally, by illegally forging and notarizing the signature of his clients, respondent has also violated Rule 8.4(b) and (d) of the Rules of Professional Conduct contained in Rule 407, SCACR, by engaging in conduct which reflects adversely on his honesty, trustworthiness, and fitness as a lawyer and by engaging in conduct which involves fraud, deceit, or misrepresentation. See S.C.Code Ann. § 26-1-95 (1991) (false certification by notary).

Under the circumstances of this case, we have decided to accept respondent's conditional admission for a public reprimand. Accordingly, respondent is hereby publicly reprimanded for his conduct in this matter.

PUBLIC REPRIMAND.

To continue reading

Request your trial
1 practice notes
  • Matter of Celsor, No. 24780.
    • United States
    • United States State Supreme Court of South Carolina
    • April 13, 1998
    ...However, respondent's misconduct does not merit a letter of caution. His misconduct warrants a public reprimand. In In re Powell, 325 S.C. 21, 478 S.E.2d 685 (1996), we accepted a conditional admission to a public reprimand for illegally forging and notarizing the signature of clients and f......
1 cases
  • Matter of Celsor, No. 24780.
    • United States
    • United States State Supreme Court of South Carolina
    • April 13, 1998
    ...However, respondent's misconduct does not merit a letter of caution. His misconduct warrants a public reprimand. In In re Powell, 325 S.C. 21, 478 S.E.2d 685 (1996), we accepted a conditional admission to a public reprimand for illegally forging and notarizing the signature of clients and f......

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