Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist

418 S.C. 279

In re Allmon

Supreme Court of South Carolina

Decided October 21, 2016

Supreme Court of South Carolina · decided 2016-10-21

Relies on In re Allmon

Decided 2016-10-21

¶1ORDER

¶2On May 22, 2013, the Court administratively suspended petitioner pursuant to Rule 419(d)(2) of the South Carolina Appellate Court Rules (SCACR). On January 15, 2014, the Court accepted an Agreement for Discipline by Consent en*280tered into between petitioner and the Office of Disciplinary-Counsel and suspended petitioner from the practice of law for one year retroactive to January 16, 2013, the date of petitioner’s interim suspension. In the Matter of Allmon, 407 S.C. 24, 753 S.E.2d 544 (2014). Petitioner has now filed a Petition for Reinstatement pursuant to Rule 419(e), SCACR, and a Petition for Reinstatement pursuant to Rule 33 of the Rules for Lawyer Disciplinary Enforcement contained in Rule 413, SCACR.

¶3After thorough consideration of the entire record, the Court grants both Petitions for Reinstatement.

s/Costa M. Pleicones, C.J.s/John W. Kittredge, J.s/Kaye G. Hearn, J.

¶4We would deny both Petitions for Reinstatement.

s/Donald W. Beatty, J.s/John Cannon Few, J.
/418/sc/279 · .json · Public domain