THE STATE OF SOUTH CAROLINA
In The Supreme Court
In the Matter of Josef
Kirk Myers, Respondent.
Opinion No. 24673
Heard May 21, 1997 - Filed August 11 , 1997
I. S. Leevy Johnson, of Johnson, Toal & Battiste, P.A., of
Columbia, for respondent.
Attorney General Charles Molony Condon and Senior
Assistant Attorney General James G. Bogle, Jr., both of
Columbia, for complainant.
PER CURIAM: In this attorney grievance matter, we impose on
Josef Kirk Myers a definite suspension from the practice of law for a period of
Medical University of South Carolina Matter
Respondent represented Sondra Trent in a personal injury action. The
Trents were treated at the Medical University of South Carolina (MUSC) for injuries
sustained in a serious automobile accident. Omni Insurance Company issued a draft
in the amount of $8,000 payable to Theodore Trent and MUSC. Respondent endorsed
the draft by typing MUSC's name on the back and deposited the draft into his trust
account. The proceeds of the draft were paid to Theodore Trent. Respondent did not
have authority to negotiate the draft.
Albertha Rouse Matter
In an unnecessarily convoluted and complicated manner, Respondent
prepared and executed numerous documents to assist his client, Albertha Rouse, in
a real estate forfeiture matter. In so doing, Respondent misrepresented to a
mortgage lender that it held a valid mortgage on his client's home. Additionally,
because of Respondent's orchestration and manipulation of real estate documentation,
IN THE MATTER OF MYERS
the lender was deceived into making loans it might not otherwise have made. We
note that Respondent's actions were not motivated by nor did he receive any personal
The evidence in the record supports the findings of violations of the
Rules of Professional Conduct, Rule 407, SCACR, Rules 8.4(d)(by engaging in conduct
involving moral turpitude); 8.4(e) (by engaging in conduct prejudicial to the
administration of justice; and 4.l(a) (by making a false statement of material fact to
a third person).
The Panel recommended a public reprimand. The Interim Review
Committee adopted the Panel's findings of fact and conclusions of law, but
recommended a ninety day suspension. Although the recommendations of the Panel
and Interim Review Committee are persuasive, the ultimate authority to discipline
attorneys and the manner of discipline rests with this Court. In re Dobson, 310 S.C.
422, 427 S.E.2d 166 (1993). We find the appropriate sanction is suspension from the
practice of law for sixty days.
Respondent shall file, within fifteen (15) days of this opinion, an affidavit
with the clerk of this Court stating he has complied with Paragraph 30 of Rule 413,
SCACR. Additionally, Respondent shall comply with Rule 32 of Rule 413, SCACR.