In the Matter of Kenneth C. Krawcheck, Respondent. Appellate Case No. 2016-001483
Submitted August 18, 2016
M. Coggiola, Disciplinary Counsel, and C. Tex Davis, Jr.,
Senior Assistant Disciplinary Counsel, both of Columbia, for
Office of Disciplinary Counsel.
Kenneth C. Krawcheck, of Charleston, Pro Se.
attorney disciplinary matter, respondent and the Office of
Disciplinary Counsel (ODC) have entered into an Agreement for
Discipline by Consent (Agreement) pursuant to Rule 21 of the
Rules for Lawyer Disciplinary Enforcement (RLDE) contained in
Rule 413 of the South Carolina Appellate Court Rules (SCACR).
In the Agreement, respondent admits misconduct and consents
to a definite suspension of three years or disbarment.
Respondent requests that the sanction be made retroactive to
the date of interim suspension. Respondent has agreed that within
thirty days of imposition of discipline, he will enter into a
payment plan with the Commission on Lawyer Conduct to (1) pay
the costs incurred by ODC and the Commission in investigating
and prosecuting this matter ($196); (2) pay Client C,
referenced below, $5, 000; (3) pay the court reporter
referenced below $711.63; and (4) reimburse the Lawyers'
Fund for Client Protection in the amount of $400.27.
Respondent has also agreed to complete the Legal Ethics and
Practice Program Ethics School and Trust Account School prior
to reinstatement. We accept the Agreement and suspend
respondent from the practice of law in this state for three
years, retroactive to the date of his interim suspension. The
facts, as set forth in the Agreement, are as follows.
letter dated April 4, 2011, respondent was informed by the
South Carolina Commission on Continuing Legal Education and
Specialization that he was suspended from the practice of law
for failure to comply with the requirements of Rules 408
(compliance with continuing legal education requirements) and
419 (administrative suspension), SCACR. On April 26, 2011,
respondent appeared at opposing counsel's office for the
taking of three depositions. Respondent did not inform
opposing counsel of his suspension. Respondent's
suspension was lifted by the Commission on May 18, 2011.
admits his conduct violated Rule 5.5(a), RPC (a lawyer shall
not practice law in a jurisdiction in violation of the
regulation of the legal profession in that jurisdiction).
2010, respondent contracted with a court reporter to provide
services for three depositions. Respondent has not paid the
court reporter. The amount due is $711.63. Respondent admits
his failure to pay the court reporter constitutes misconduct.
See In re Jackson, 365 S.C. 176, 617 S.E.2d 123
(2005)(failure to timely pay a court reporter constitutes
grounds for attorney discipline).
C hired respondent to handle a legal matter and paid
respondent a $5, 000 retainer. Respondent failed to return
several messages left by Client C seeking an update on the
matter. After continued limited communication, Client C
terminated the representation. Respondent has not returned
Client C's file or any unused portion of the retainer.
failed to provide a written response to the complaint filed
by Client C, and failed to appear or provide documents in
response to a subpoena and notice to appear from ODC.
Respondent admits his conduct violated the following Rules of
Professional Conduct, Rule 407, SCACR: Rule 1.3 (a lawyer
shall act with reasonable diligence and promptness in
representing a client); Rule 1.4 (a lawyer shall keep the
client reasonably informed about the status of the matter and
promptly comply with reasonable requests for information);
Rule 1.16 (requirements upon termination of representation);
and Rule 8.1 (a lawyer in connection with a disciplinary
matter shall not knowingly fail to respond to a lawful demand
for information from a disciplinary authority).