stanbery-33434.pdf (2011)
Archived Content: This document is formally archived for historical reference.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 (stanbery-33434.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.
mm
2331er so P!â M?
} 93ââ 9Rk§ Â¥113>3$1 EMâ
SEEMnâ
RY
[N DISCIPLWA DI' STR
ICT III g,» SS-oeetosuâ;
OF THE meme
BOARD OF PROFESSIONAL RESPONSIEMTY . mew -
OF THE
SUPREME ooURT OF TENNESSEE
IN RE: CHARLES E. STANBERRY, 311., BPRNO. 21268 FILE NO. 33 434.31%;
Respondent, an aï¬omoy licensed
to practice law in Tennessee
(Hamilton County)
PUBLIC CBNSURB
' The eoove complaint was ï¬ied against Charles E. Stanherry, 312, an attorney licensed to
â praoï¬ceâlaw 'm'Temlessee, alleging certain acts of misconduct. Pursuant to supreme 00111131113
9, the Board of Professional Responsibility considered these matters at its meeting on March 11,
2km.
' The client hired Respondent to ï¬le probate for his deceased wife and paid him
approxhnatol'g} $2,000. Respondent opened the esteie in December 2007, but provided no otheE
legal services, oiosod his ofï¬ce and thereafter couldnât be found by the client. The olient had to
ï¬nalize the probate matter himeetf. The Clerk of Court stated that from December 15, 2008 until
Respondent's license was sospended in April 2010, she attempted. to contact Reeponclont
numerous times, both in writing and by phone to got me estate olooed, but She was unsuccessful.
The Clerk had Rospomlent come into her ofï¬ce, gave him all of the documents necessary to
close âdoe estate, but he failed to take aotion. Respondent failed. to respond to the Board regarding _
this oooaplaint. Respondeot was disbarred on February 14, 2011, for Similar conduct.
By his conduct, Respondent has violated Rules of Professional Conduct 1.1
(competence), 1.3 (diligence), 1.4 (communication), 1.5 (fees) and 8.16)) (failure to reepcmd to
- disciplinary counsel).
FOR. THE BOARD OF
PROFESSIONAL RESPONSIBILETY
dead. WQCCMW
1:61am Iioï¬abaugh, Chew
0401a .17! my
IDatvé