In the Matter of William D. Rhoad, IV

Summary

The South Carolina Supreme Court publicly reprimanded attorney William D. Rhoad, IV, pursuant to an Agreement for Discipline by Consent. The court found violations involving competence, diligence, client communication, file retention, failure to restore a case to the active docket, failure to prepare a divorce decree, failure to appear at a family-court hearing, and delayed response to disciplinary authorities, and imposed costs and ethics-school conditions.

Holdings

1. The court accepted the Agreement for Discipline by Consent.
2. Respondent violated Rules 1.1, 1.3, 1.4, 1.16(c), 1.16(d), 3.4(c), 8.1(b), 8.4(a), and 8.4(e) of the Rules of Professional Conduct, Rule 407, SCACR, and Rule 7(a)(1) of the Rules for Lawyer Disciplinary Enforcement, Rule 413, SCACR.
3. Respondent's misconduct warranted a public reprimand, payment of disciplinary costs, and completion of the Legal Ethics and Practice Program Ethics School.

Questions Presented

1. Whether the Agreement for Discipline by Consent should be accepted.
2. Whether respondent's admitted violations of the Rules of Professional Conduct and Rules for Lawyer Disciplinary Enforcement warranted a public reprimand.
3. What conditions and costs should accompany the disciplinary sanction.

Disposition

other