In re Samaha

399 S.C. 2 (2012) · Supreme Court of South Carolina · August 1, 2012

Summary

The South Carolina Supreme Court imposed a one-year definite suspension on attorney George Thomas Samaha, III, for misconduct arising from his representation of a widow in matters involving her late husband's estate. The misconduct included charging excessive fees, failing to cooperate in probate proceedings, making a false statement under oath, and engaging in conflicts of interest by preparing documents that gave him control over the client's affairs. The court also ordered Samaha to reimburse $3,086.64 in disciplinary-proceeding costs.

Holdings

  1. The record supported findings that Samaha committed misconduct by charging excessive fees, failing to cooperate in probate proceedings and making a false statement under oath, and engaging in conflicts of interest involving documents that gave him control over Lillian's affairs.
  2. The Supreme Court has sole authority to determine the appropriate attorney-discipline sanction and is not bound by the Hearing Panel's recommendation.
  3. A one-year definite suspension from the practice of law, reimbursement of $3,086.64 in proceeding costs, and compliance with Rule 30 were appropriate sanctions for Samaha's misconduct.

Questions Presented

  1. Whether the record established Samaha's violations of the South Carolina Rules of Professional Conduct and Rules for Lawyer Disciplinary Enforcement by clear and convincing evidence.
  2. Whether a one-year definite suspension and assessment of proceeding costs were appropriate sanctions for the established misconduct.

Disposition

other

Cases Cited (9)

  • In re White, 391 S.C. 581, 707 S.E.2d 411 (2011)(followed)
  • In re Thompson, 343 S.C. 1, 10, 539 S.E.2d 396, 401 (2000)(followed)
  • In re Hazzard, 377 S.C. 482, 488, 661 S.E.2d 102, 106 (2008)(followed)
  • In re Greene, 371 S.C. 207, 216, 638 S.E.2d 677, 682 (2006)(followed)
  • In re Hursey, 395 S.C. 527, 719 S.E.2d 670 (2011)(followed)
  • In re Prendergast, 390 S.C. 395, 402-04, 702 S.E.2d 364, 367-68 (2010)(followed)
  • In re Crummey, 388 S.C. 286, 289-91, 696 S.E.2d 589, 591 (2010)(followed)
  • In re Jones, 359 S.C. 156, 597 S.E.2d 800 (2004)(followed)
  • In re Wilmeth, 373 S.C. 631, 632-33, 647 S.E.2d 185, 186 (2007)(distinguished)

Cited In (0)

No citing cases on record yet.

Court Document

Open PDF
Loading document…