BOARD OF PROFESSIONAL RESPONSIBILITY (2005)
Archived Content: This document is formally archived for historical reference. The original PDF remains the official record for legal purposes.
Need help? Please use the Assistance Request Form below.
Original PDF Document
Download Official Record (jessup-23347-3-rel632458809119773336.pdf)
Alternative Accessible HTML
Accessible Alternative: This HTML version is an automatically processed accessible alternative. While it provides a searchable format, the text extraction may contain formatting or character errors. The original PDF remains the authoritative official record.
Need a different format? Use the Request Assistance Form.
BOARD OF PROFESSIONAL RESPONSIBILITY
of the
SUPREME COURT OF TENNESSEE
LANCE B. BRACY WILLIAM W. HUNT, III
CHIEF DISCIPLINARY COUNSEL 1101 KERMIT DRIVE, SUITE 730 CHARLES A. HIGH
NASHVILLE, TENNESSEE 37217 SANDY GARRETT
LAURA L. CHASTAIN TELEPHONE: (615) 361-7500 JESSE D. JOSEPH
DEPUTY CHIEF DISCIPLINARY COUNSEL
(800) 486-5714 JAMES A. VICK
FAX: (615) 367-2480 THERESA M. COSTONIS
BEVERLY P. SHARPE
CONSUMER COUNSEL DIRECTOR
E-MAIL: ethics@tbpr.org DISCIPLINARY COUNSEL
RELEASE OF INFORMATION
RE: WILLIAM EUGENE JESSUP, BPR NO. 9194
CONTACT: JAMES A. VICK
BOARD OF PROFESSIONAL RESPONSIBILITY
615-361-7500
March 4, 2005
FORMER CHATTANOOGA LAWYER CENSURED
William Eugene Jessup, formerly a Chattanooga attorney, received a Public Censure
from the Board of Professional Responsibility on March 4, 2005, for charging a client an
excessive fee. Mr. Jessup was engaged in 1996 to enroll a foreign judgment and sue his client's
ex-husband for contempt. The case was highly contested. Mr. Jessup was successful in
obtaining judgment on behalf of his client. Mr. Jessup charged a fee of in excess of $41,000.00
for time and expenses expended on the case, of which Mr. Jessup had been paid $17,418.00. On
May 18, 1998, Mr. Jessup filed suit against the client for the balance of his fees. The client filed
a counter-claim against Mr. Jessup claiming that Mr. Jessup had charged a clearly excessive fee
for that type of case. The case was tried before a jury on September 25, 2001, and the jury found
that Mr. Jessup attempted to collect a clearly excessive fee. Judgment was awarded against Mr.
Jessup on October 17, 2001. The Court of Appeals affirmed the trial court by opinion filed
November 29, 2004. Mr. Jessup's conduct violated DR 2-106(A).
A Public Censure is a form of public discipline which declares the conduct of the lawyer
improper but does not limit the lawyer's right to practice.
Jessup 23347-3 rel.doc