Please E-mail suggested additions, comments and/or corrections to Kent@MoreLaw.Com.

Help support the publication of case reports on MoreLaw

In the Matter of Larry S. Drayton.

Date: 04-08-2002

Case Number: 25439

Judge: Per Curiam

Court: South Carolina Supreme Court

Plaintiff's Attorney: "_new">Henry B. Richardson, Jr., and
"_new">Michael S. Pauley, both of Columbia, for the Office of Disciplinary Counsel.

Defendant's Attorney: "_new">Larry S. Drayton, pro se, of Ridgeland.

Description:
In this attorney disciplinary matter, respondent and Disciplinary Counsel have entered into an Agreement for Discipline by Consent pursuant to Rule 21, RLDE, Rule 413, SCACR. In the Agreement, respondent admits misconduct and consents to the imposition of any sanction deemed appropriate by this Court. We accept the Agreement and impose a definite suspension of ninety days from the practice of law. The facts as admitted in the Agreement are as follows.


Facts


In 1993, this Court suspended respondent from the practice of law because of his failure to complete the Continuing Legal Education requirements for the year 1992. However, respondent did not surrender his certificate to practice law, as required by the Rules for Lawyer Disciplinary Enforcement. Respondent remained suspended from the practice of law until 1999, when this Court granted his petition for reinstatement.


In December 1997, during the course of his suspension, respondent assisted a non-custodial parent at a child support conference. In connection with this conference, respondent negotiated with a representative from the South Carolina Department of Social Services and signed an order on behalf of the non-custodial parent. Also in December 1997, respondent assisted a friend at a Rule to Show Cause hearing in family court and assisted in establishing a repayment plan.

* * *

Click the case caption above for the full text of the Court's opinion.

Outcome:
Respondent has fully acknowledged that his actions in the aforementioned matters were in violation of the Rules for Lawyer Disciplinary Enforcement. We therefore suspend respondent from the practice of law for ninety days. Within fifteen days of the date of this opinion, respondent shall file an affidavit with the Clerk of Court showing that he has complied with Rule 30, RLDE, Rule 413, SCACR.


Dedinite Suspension.

Plaintiff's Experts:
Unavailable
Defendant's Experts:
Unavailable
Comments:
C.L.

About This Case

What was the outcome of In the Matter of Larry S. Drayton.?

The outcome was: Respondent has fully acknowledged that his actions in the aforementioned matters were in violation of the Rules for Lawyer Disciplinary Enforcement. We therefore suspend respondent from the practice of law for ninety days. Within fifteen days of the date of this opinion, respondent shall file an affidavit with the Clerk of Court showing that he has complied with Rule 30, RLDE, Rule 413, SCACR. Dedinite Suspension.

Which court heard In the Matter of Larry S. Drayton.?

This case was heard in South Carolina Supreme Court, SC. The presiding judge was Per Curiam.

Who were the attorneys in In the Matter of Larry S. Drayton.?

Plaintiff's attorney: Henry B. Richardson, Jr., and Michael S. Pauley, both of Columbia, for the Office of Disciplinary Counsel.. Defendant's attorney: Larry S. Drayton, pro se, of Ridgeland..

When was In the Matter of Larry S. Drayton. decided?

This case was decided on April 8, 2002.