The South Carolina Bar Ethics Advisory Committee provides the full text of all ethics opinions since 1990 online. To find the opinion you need, simply use the search form below.
The opinions in this database contain the advice of the Committee based on the state of the law at the time of each opinion. Opinions are not updated to reflect changes in the Rules of Professional Conduct, more recent opinions, or other law. Further research may be necessary. Earlier opinions are available through vLex Fastcase.
Frequently Asked Questions are also available.
Ethics Advisory Opinion 94-36
Illustrations on professional cards must not convey a false or misleading message. While use of the scales of justice by a lawyer appears appropriate, use of the state seal by a lawyer no longer employed by the state would appear misleading. The result does not depend upon whether the lawyer is a former constitutional officer.
Ethics Advisory Opinion 94-35
Attorney 1) is not required to withdraw from the representation, 2) may be permitted to withdraw from the representation, and 3) should seek the appointment of a guardian for Client.
Ethics Advisory Opinion 94-34
The proposed commission arrangement would be a clear violation of the prohibition against sharing legal fees with a nonlawyer (Rule 5.4) and the prohibition against paying a non- lawyer a commission for channeling work to a lawyer (Rule 7.2 (c)).
Ethics Advisory Opinion 94-33A
Attorney A is not prohibited from representing the Agency before a Chief Procurement Officer if he recuses himself from service on the Panel in any appeal involving that matter.
Ethics Advisory Opinion 94-33
The essential ethical issue is thus whether Attorney A can serve as a hearing officer on the Panel and still maintain a lawyer/client relationship with an Agency that regularly appears before the Panel.
Ethics Advisory Opinion 94-32
The fact that no members of the law firm will participate in the prosecution of the criminal defendant is counterbalanced by the fact that members of the law firm participate in an ongoing program of prosecuting cases in the circuit solicitor's office. Representation of the state in the solicitor's office is directly adverse to representation of a person under prosecution by the state in the same solicitor's office.
Ethics Advisory Opinion 94-31
It is not a violation for members of the law firm to be court appointed to represent indigent criminal defendants in a circuit different from the circuit of a part-time solicitor.
Ethics Advisory Opinion 94-30
Although the question asked involves matters of substantive law regarding evidentiary privileges which generally are not considered by this Committee, there are important ethical issues in this question which need to be addressed.
Ethics Advisory Opinion 94-28
The lawyer is not ethically prohibited from representing the municipality in a contractual dispute with the Department of Corrections, despite the fact that the lawyer has a contract with a different state agency to provide legal services.
Ethics Advisory Opinion 94-27
Participation on general discussions on legal topics via electronic media is permissible. However, the practice of law via electronic media creates several issues that may violate the South Carolina Rules of Professional Conduct.