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Archived Content: This document is formally archived for historical reference.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 (slavin-1503-0-rel632550536812309643.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
EDWARD A. SLAVIN, JR., BPR #12341
CONTACT: LAURA L. CHASTAIN
BOARD OF PROFESSIONAL RESPONSIBILITY
615-361-7500
June 22, 2005
SUSPENDED LAWYER FOUND IN CONTEMPT
On June 17, 2005, the Supreme Court of Tennessee found Edward A. Slavin, Jr.
of St. Augustine, Florida in willful contempt of the Court. He was sentenced to ten (10) days in
jail and fined $50.00.
Slavinâs law license was suspended on August 27, 2004 for a period of two (2)
years. The suspension order specifically mandated that Slavin comply in all respects with
Tennessee Supreme Court Rule 9 and specifically with Section 18 regarding the obligations and
responsibilities of suspended attorneys.
Disciplinary Counsel filed a Petition for Contempt charging Slavin with
contemptuous conduct as follows:
1. That Slavin had failed to comply with the Supreme Courtâs Order of suspension;
2. That Slavin had entered his appearance representing clients after having been
suspended by Order of this Court on August 27, 2004; and
3. That Slavin has failed to comply with Section 18 of Tennessee Supreme Court
Rule 9 as ordered August 27, 2004, by failing to notify opposing counsel and
clients of his suspension and by failing to file an affidavit to that affect.
The Court found that Slavinâs failure or refusal to comply with the Order to file
the affidavit required by Section 18.8 of Supreme Court Rule 9 was willful and constituted
willful contempt of the Court beyond a reasonable doubt.
Slavin 1503-0 rel.doc