Irmo lawyer resigns from Bar after citation for unethical advertising | Columbia Business
COLUMBIA — An Irmo legal professional who experienced been cited for unethical marketing practices has resigned from the South Carolina Bar, in accordance to a assertion from the condition Supreme Courtroom.
Ray A. Lord submitted a resignation that was recognized and must surrender his regulation license inside 15 times, in accordance to a Feb. 10 court doc.
The court’s purchase also cites Lord as obtaining been convicted of a “significant criminal offense,” but presents no particulars.

A lookup of nearby and federal court information located no felony situations involving Lord as defendant.
In accordance to the web-site of his sole practitioner regulation business, Lord is a former assistant solicitor in the Ninth Judicial Circuit workplace in Charleston and had served as director of the drug court docket in Charleston County.
His internet site also touts his past working experience as a sheriff’s deputy, a assertion that is connected to earlier Bar sanctions he acquired. Lord marketed that he could assist consumers going through foreclosure, targeted traffic tickets or other lawful difficulties.
Lord did not straight away reply to a call in search of remark.
In 2017, Lord was reprimanded by the Bar for unethical promotion methods, including overstating his experience in the courtroom program in saying he experienced “28 a long time working experience both of those as a attorney and previous legislation enforcement officer.”
The 2017 reprimand pointed out that he experienced 16 years’ knowledge as a attorney, when Lord was citing a total of time in each of the roles.

Lord also was cited in 2017 for sending immediate solicitation letters to probable clientele saying he experienced acquired of their lawful issues “from court docket information.” The Bar known as that quotation insufficiently precise.
The cell phone variety at the time for Lord’s apply, (844) FIXTICKET, also was cited in 2017 as unethical for the reason that it implied a promise to provide a specific result to a court case and implied that it could be performed through unethical signifies, according to a courtroom document.
The 2017 reprimand also discloses that Lord was reprimanded privately in 2012 for his response to a publishing on a web-site that offers opinions of lawyers. His reply the two disclosed information of the situation in query and disparaged the work of general public defenders, according to the disciplinary motion.

