Even though one cannot be certain, I have reasonable basis to believe that L.S. was an out of state client who I have never personally met but had numerous and substantive communications during this brief representation of her.
L.S. requested services including conveyance of a deed of real property between family members. The fee agreed to and services rendered contemplated no unforeseen “complications”. However, “complications” arose when through a check of public records it was discovered that the conveyance could not take place because of prior and defective transfers of property made earlier by L.S. personally.
I advised L.S. that my fee and services would not change if she decided to cure the defect without further assistance from my law office. I also provided her a detailed and written explanation of the problem and defect involved and gave her the procedure to cure the problem. (Later, the complainant did correct the defective problem and did so consistent with my opinion and recommendation.)
I did give her a revised quote if she wanted me to perform these additional services myself.
If I had known L.S. would get a second legal opinion, I would not have hesitated in forwarding my legal and title opinion to that attorney for his/her review.
L.S. decided to file a grievance against me with two respective commissions of the SC Bar for apparent unethical conduct. However, the grievances and relief sought were dismissed and denied by those commissions.
For those readers that believe character and reputation do matter professionally and personally, I have been in the practice of law for over 40 years and have never been subject to a reprimand of any kind.
L.S.’s recommendation to avoid me for legal services greatly pales in comparison to protecting and defending my reputation, legal or otherwise.
We can only take our integrity and name to the grave and I intend to leave this earth with my good name intact despite unjust criticisms from anonymous and false dissenters.
more