News, updates and requests!

I recently posted this on TWEN but realized that many of you have not joined us on that platform ( sigh) but not to worry, here is the information

Here are a few updates and items of interest from the Pro Bono Program
1. Buttons!  Yes, we now have reminder buttons for all volunteers to help them to remember to enter their volunteer hours into M.Y. Pro Bono: Managing Your Pro Bono. It takes less than 10 seconds and is a great habit to prepare you for those billable hour reports ( Yikes ) More information here: https://sc.edu/study/colleges_schools/law/internal/department/pro_bono/my_pro_bono.php
Come by the office to pick up your button!  It’s a good look!
2. Looking for just a few special volunteers from all three classes! We will form a team of super stars to create a legal information flyer for the 5th Circuit Public Defender’s office.   Time is flexible.
3. Are you just overwhelmed with school, work, life?  But still want to help the Pro Bono Program? It may not seem like much but helping us put up posters about Daniel’s Law or the Responsible Fathers Registry is simple but important.  Getting the information out about these two issues is key and a constant need.  Come by and get a packet of ready to put up posters and post as you drive around the state. Not to worry there are suggestions and information. Good for male and female students
4. 2L and 3L’s There is still room at the Friday Blitzes for this semester.  Once a month from 2:30-5 at the SC Bar Building.  A chance to work along side an attorney as you respond to questions posted by the public to an online forum.  Entertaining and a learning experience for all of us. Sign up and details here:
Any Alumni on this list? We would love to see YOU at the Friday Blitz!
5. HELP!  Not the Beatles song but the twice a month Homeless Legal Clinic.  ANY law student can conduct the intake interview.  The HELP Clinic is held the 1st and 3rd Thursday of each month from 8:30-10 at Transitions. A great way to interact with attorneys! Sign up here: http://www.signupgenius.com/go/4090a4babad2eabfe3-project
6. Last reminder! Still adding names to a list of new volunteers willing to serve as guardians ad litem in Probate Court. Once we have a list of 10-12 volunteers sign-up, a convenient training schedule will be set up! Typically this involves 4 two-hour sessions in the evening.  Once trained you will be paired with an experienced volunteer. The team will be appointed by the Probate Judge, review the file, conduct an interview of the proposed guardian and the alleged incapacitated person and file a report with the Court. Whew! Sounds like a lot but in reality each case is fascinating and do not take long. Big on experience and low on time commitment!
Have questions? want more information?  Check the web and contact the Office now
That’s all folks!
Pam Robinson. Robinspd@law.sc.edu 

Don’t steal from clients!

Wrong, just plain wrong! Florida attorney just can’t stop himself!

The court found error in a finding of remorse

In the instant case, we hold that the referee’s finding of remorse is clearly erroneous and without support in the record. The record evidence demonstrates that Horton testified at length about the harm to his reputation in the community and the effect these proceedings have had on his family. He accused the Bar of prosecuting him “as a trophy being hunted for the kill so [his] head could be mounted on their wall” and compared the proceedings to “facing a firing squad for a traffic violation.” Further, Horton has continuously attempted to minimize his misconduct, asserting repeatedly that no client was harmed and no money was missing. We find no evidence in the record to indicate that Horton has expressed remorse for his misconduct or otherwise accepted responsibility for his actions.

The misconduct involved elderly clients

As it pertains to R.O.C., Horton paid himself fees in multiple amounts from August 2014 through November 2016. In 2014, Horton wrote himself thirteen checks from R.O.C.’s account totaling $13,700. That year, Horton invoiced R.O.C. for his legal fees. In 2015, Horton wrote himself thirty-four checks, totaling $43,000. However, he returned approximately $4800 to R.O.C.’s accounts. In 2016, Horton wrote himself thirty-three checks, totaling $82,840, and he returned approximately $40,050 to R.O.C.’s accounts. The referee determined that “[g]iven respondent’s financial circumstances, the additional funds were taken to help minimize the monetary issues that he was facing.” Regarding the $40,000 that Horton returned to R.O.C. in 2016, the referee determined that there “was no satisfactory rationale” to explain why Horton took these funds. Horton did not invoice R.O.C. for his legal services in 2015 and 2016. Although Horton eventually advised R.O.C. of the payments in writing, he only did so after the Bar began its investigation. And, in doing so, Horton inaccurately represented to his client that he took $38,200 in 2015 and $39,760 in 2016 without further elaboration. Accordingly, we find that the record supports a finding that Horton deliberately transferred funds from R.O.C.’s account for his own personal benefit, knowing that he was not entitled to those funds.

 

The Difference- August edition

Just a few highlights, thoughts and stuff you can use.  Your personal copy was delivered by email today, with active hyperlinks! Check your junk, spam folder and add Robinspd@law.sc.edu to your list. We promise not to flood you will messages.