From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

In the Matter of Gibbes

Supreme Court of South Carolina
Jun 21, 1993
315 S.C. 186 (S.C. 1993)

Summary

finding lawyer responsible for failure “to adequately oversee the day-to-day operations of his firm and ... to adequately supervise his employees,” finding fault because lawyer “maintained too many financial accounts on which several employees had signatory authority; and, therefore, lost the ability to maintain the integrity of the funds therein,” and ordering lawyer to pay restitution to bank

Summary of this case from Mark D. Dean, P.S.C. v. Commonwealth Bank & Trust Co.

Opinion

23878

Submitted April 27, 1993

Decided June 21, 1993

PUBLIC REPRIMAND

Atty. Gen. T. Travis Medlock and Asst. Atty. Gen. James G. Bogle, Jr., Columbia, for complainant. Brian P. Gibbes, pro se.


In this attorney grievance proceeding, respondent admits that he has committed ethical violations and consents to a public reprimand. We accept respondent's admission and publicly reprimand him.

The ethical violations committed by respondent arise from the misappropriation of client funds by one of his employees. Between November 1989 and November 1990, an employee in charge of bookkeeping embezzled approximately $25,000 from firm accounts. As a result, funds from numerous accounts were used for purposes other than those for which they were intended.

Respondent admits that he failed to adequately oversee the day-to-day operations of his firm and failed to adequately supervise his employees. He also admits that he maintained too many financial accounts on which several employees had signatory authority; and, therefore, lost the ability to maintain the integrity of the funds therein.

Respondent has violated Rule 5.3 of the Rules of Professional Conduct, Rule 407, SCACR, by failing to assure that the conduct of his non-lawyer personnel was compatible with his professional obligations as a lawyer. As a result, respondent has also violated Rule 1.15 of Rule 407 by commingling funds, failing to account for funds, and failing to promptly deliver funds to his clients.

Under the facts of this matter, we find the appropriate sanction is a public reprimand. Respondent shall make restitution to NationsBank, or its agent, in the amount of $23,931.18 pursuant to terms agreed to between respondent and NationsBank, as well as to any other clients who have not been reimbursed for misappropriated funds.

Public reprimand.


Summaries of

In the Matter of Gibbes

Supreme Court of South Carolina
Jun 21, 1993
315 S.C. 186 (S.C. 1993)

finding lawyer responsible for failure “to adequately oversee the day-to-day operations of his firm and ... to adequately supervise his employees,” finding fault because lawyer “maintained too many financial accounts on which several employees had signatory authority; and, therefore, lost the ability to maintain the integrity of the funds therein,” and ordering lawyer to pay restitution to bank

Summary of this case from Mark D. Dean, P.S.C. v. Commonwealth Bank & Trust Co.

In Matter of Gibbes, 315 S.C. 186, 432 S.E.2d 482 (1993), this Court imposed a public reprimand on attorney for failing to supervise an employee who engaged in misconduct.

Summary of this case from Matter of Marshall
Case details for

In the Matter of Gibbes

Case Details

Full title:In the Matter of Brian P. Gibbes, Respondent

Court:Supreme Court of South Carolina

Date published: Jun 21, 1993

Citations

315 S.C. 186 (S.C. 1993)
432 S.E.2d 482

Citing Cases

Matter of Marshall

In Matter ofCraig, 317 S.C. 295, 454 S.E.2d 314 (1995), this Court suspended attorney for fifteen months for…

Mark D. Dean, P.S.C. v. Commonwealth Bank & Trust Co.

And lawyers and law firms whose employees are authorized signatories on escrow accounts are commonly held…