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Archived Content: This document is formally archived for historical reference.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 (james-1474-9-rel632563480324332156.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
1101 KERMIT DRIVE, SUITE 730
NASHVILLE, TENNESSEE 37217
TELEPHONE: (615) 361-7500
(800) 486-5714
FAX: (615) 367-2480
E-MAIL: ethics@tbpr.org
Website: www.tbpr.org
RELEASE OF INFORMATION
IN RE: DAVID D. JAMES, JR., BPR # 11006
CONTACT: JESSE D. JOSEPH
BOARD OF PROFESSIONAL RESPONSIBILITY
615-361-7500
July 7, 2005
FORMER MEMPHIS LAWYER SUSPENDED
David D. James, Jr., formerly of Memphis and currently residing in Olive Branch, MS, was
suspended from the practice of law for one year effective July 10, 2005, by Order of the
Tennessee Supreme Court filed on June 30, 2005. James had previously been temporarily
suspended from the practice of law on June 16, 2004 for failure to respond to a complaint of
misconduct, and on June 23, 2003, the Board placed his law license on inactive status due to his
own request.
A petition for discipline was filed by the Board against James on November 2, 2004
alleging that he acknowledged receipt of $250 in attorney fees from a client in September, 2002
for him to add a creditor to her prior Chapter 7 Bankruptcy. The petition also alleged that James
did not file the requested Motion to Reopen the clientâs bankruptcy matter, but kept the $250
paid to him. James failed to respond to the petition, and accordingly, a motion for default
judgment was filed and granted against him on March 30, 2005.
A hearing on the petition for discipline as to disciplinary sanction was conducted before a
Hearing Panel of the Board on March 30, 2005. James did not appear at the hearing. The
Hearing Panel in its April 11, 2005 Judgment found that James violated the Code of Professional
Responsibility, and the Tennessee Rules of Professional Conduct due to his failure to perform or
to communicate with his client, his neglect of her matter, and his apparent misappropriation of
the clientâs fees. The Panel also found that his evading properly addressed certified mail and his
failure to cooperate, answer or defend, his indifference to making restitution to the client, and his
substantial experience in the practice of law were aggravating circumstances in this case.
The Hearing Panel found that James should be suspended from the practice of law for
one year effective 10 days after the date of any Supreme Court order incorporating the Panelâs
Judgment, and that any reinstatement of his license should be conditioned upon his filing a
petition for reinstatement and complying with the conditions imposed in such a reinstatement
1
proceeding, upon his obtaining dissolution from the Supreme Court of the June 16, 2004
temporary suspension order, and upon his obtaining a return to active status from the Supreme
Court if his law license remains inactive for five (5) years.
The Tennessee Supreme Court incorporated the April 11, 2005 Judgment of the Hearing
Panel in its June 30, 2005 suspension order.
The suspension will remain in effect until an Order of Reinstatement, if any, is issued by
the Tennessee Supreme Court. Reinstatement would be granted only if James demonstrates by
clear and convincing evidence that he has the moral qualifications, competency, and learning
required for admission to the practice of law and that his resumption of practice would not be
detrimental to the integrity and standing of the bar or administration of justice or subversive to
the public interest.
The Order requires James to pay the costs of the disciplinary proceeding as a condition to
being reinstated to the practice of law.
James 1474-9 rel.doc
2