Walker, Matter of, No. 23483

• Court: United States State Supreme Court of South Carolina
• Writing for the Court: PER CURIAM; GREGORY; GREGORY
• Citation: 305 S.C. 482,409 S.E.2d 412
• Parties: In the Matter of Timothy R. WALKER, Respondent. . Heard
• Decision Date: 14 August 1991
• Docket Number: No. 23483

Page 412

409 S.E.2d 412 305 S.C. 482 In the Matter of Timothy R. WALKER, Respondent. No. 23483. Supreme Court of South Carolina. Heard Aug. 14, 1991.
Decided Sept. 23, 1991.
Rehearing Denied Oct. 23, 1991.

Page 413

[305 S.C. 483] Atty. Gen. T. Travis Medlock, Asst. Attys. Gen. James G. Bogle, Jr. and J. Emory Smith, Jr., Columbia, for complainant.

Cameron B. Littlejohn, Jr., of Lewis, Babcock & Hawkins, Columbia, for respondent.

PER CURIAM:

This case involves a disciplinary proceeding in which respondent Timothy R. Walker was alleged to have committed various acts of misconduct in violation of provisions of the Code of Professional Responsibility. ¹ The conduct giving rise to the allegations contained in successive complaints initially arose from respondent's representation of a client who engaged him in May of 1986 to obtain an expungement order. More than two years later, respondent saw the client at a party and told him that he was a "free man" and that the expungement had been legally effected, when in fact, it had not. When the client asked to see a copy of the expungement, respondent told him to stop by respondent's office. A few days later, the client went to respondent's office whereupon respondent gave the client a copy of an expungement order which had been purportedly signed by a circuit judge.

The client was troubled that there was no filing stamp on the order and that the year on the order appeared to have been changed from 1986 to 1988. He took the alleged expungement order to the Clerk of Court's office and was informed that it was invalid because the circuit judge's signature had [305 S.C. 484] been forged. About ten days after giving the client the forged expungement order, respondent handed up to a circuit judge a consent motion and order which was legally effected.

A hearing on this matter was held on November 28, 1989, before the Hearing Panel of the Board of Commissioners on Grievances and Discipline to determine whether respondent's unauthorized signature of the circuit judge's name on the proposed expungement order constituted unethical conduct. Respondent maintained that he did not intend to perpetrate a fraud on the judicial system as the order was never filed. Respondent also maintained that he had likewise not intended to perpetrate a fraud on his client; respondent stated that he had signed the circuit judge's name on the order in his own handwriting in the client's presence merely in an attempt to demonstrate how such an order would be signed by a judge.

At the conclusion of this hearing, the Hearing Panel elected to withhold judgment and requested examples of respondent's signature so that it could determine whether respondent's signing of the circuit judge's name in a large, flaring fashion was typical of respondent's signature or whether respondent had attempted to duplicate

Page 414

the circuit judge's signature. In response to the Hearing Panel's request that each side submit documents reflecting respondent's signature style, respondent submitted twelve documents. Two of the twelve documents signed by respondent, when compared to the originals obtained from the Clerk of Court's office, indicated a different style and type of initials and signature. Consequently, an amended complaint was filed alleging that respondent had falsified his own signature on two of the twelve documents furnished by him to make his signature look larger than it normally was and to mislead the Hearing Panel as to the evidence in this case. Subsequent allegations were also made against respondent: that respondent had falsified other signatures on the consent motions for expungement.

After a second hearing, the Hearing Panel found...