THE STATE OF SOUTH CAROLINA 

In The Supreme Court 

In the Matter of Julie Maria Fitzharris, Respondent. 

Appellate Case No. 2015-002587 

Opinion No. 27604 

Submitted January 21, 2016 – Filed February 17, 2016 

DEFINITE SUSPENSION 

Lesley M. Coggiola, Disciplinary Counsel, and Julie K. 

Martino, Assistant Disciplinary Counsel, both of 

Columbia, for Office of Disciplinary Counsel. 

Julie Maria Fitzharris, of Fitzharris Law Firm, LLC, of 

Charleston, pro se. 

PER CURIAM: In this 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 

the imposition of a definite suspension of nine (9) months with conditions. We 

accept the Agreement and suspend respondent from the practice of law in this state 

for three (3) months with conditions as stated hereafter. The facts, as set forth in 

the Agreement, are as follows. 

Facts 

In October 2010, Client retained respondent to represent him in a negligence action 

for damages related to a burn he received while receiving treatment at a 

chiropractor's office. Respondent attempted to negotiate with the defendant's 

insurance carrier but the adjuster was not interested in settling. Respondent then 

consulted with a chiropractor in Georgia who reviewed the case, provided an 
 

affidavit, and agreed to serve as an expert witness on Client's behalf. In September 

2012, respondent filed a Notice of Intent to File Suit. 

The chiropractor's insurance carrier then agreed to forgo mediation and to negotiate 

a settlement. Respondent believed the parties had reached an agreement to settle 

the case for $3,200.00 and was expecting a check. Respondent neither made a note 

of the date of this verbal agreement nor requested written confirmation of the 

settlement agreement. 

In December 2014, respondent reviewed Client's file. She noted that there was no 

settlement check in the file but thought it was due to an administrative delay. On 

December 4, 2014, she delivered a check for $2,000.00 to Client and told Client 

the case had settled for $3,200.00 and she was advancing the $2,000.00 from her 

operating account. Respondent told Client she would give him the remainder of 

the settlement in January 2015. She apologized to Client for the time it had taken 

to settle the case and that she would neither take a fee nor reimburse herself for 

expenses. Respondent also stated the Medicare lien could take some time to 

resolve. At the conclusion of that meeting, respondent put Client's file in the trunk 

of her car and did not follow up with Client about outstanding issues. Respondent 

did not retrieve the file from the trunk of her car until after she received the 

complaint in this matter. 

When she reviewed the file in June 2015, respondent realized no settlement check 

had been received, no settlement statement had been signed, and the Medicare lien 

was still outstanding. Respondent found an email from defense counsel that she 

had not previously read that stated the case was not settled and that it had been 

dismissed because the statute of limitations had expired. Respondent 

acknowledges she failed to calendar the case in any way and, therefore, she missed 

the statute of limitations. 

During the pendency of Client's case, respondent had several surgeries on her back 

and shoulder, there were complications with almost all of the surgeries, and she 

was taking narcotics and muscle relaxers to alleviate the pain and muscle spasms. 

Respondent was, and still is, being treated for depression and anxiety in relation to 

her physical ailments. She acknowledges that these physical and mental health 

issues contributed to the problems with Client's case. 
Law 

Respondent admits that by her conduct she has violated the following provisions of 

the Rules of Professional Conduct, Rule 407, SCACR: Rule 1.3 (lawyer shall act 

with reasonable diligence and promptness in representing client); Rule 1.8(h)(2) 

(lawyer shall not settle claim or potential claim for malpractice liability with 

unrepresented client unless that person is advised in writing of desirability of 

seeking and is given reasonable opportunity to seek advice of independent legal 

counsel in connection therewith); Rule 1.16(a)(2) (lawyer shall withdraw from 

representation when lawyer's physical or mental condition materially impairs 

lawyer's ability to represent client); Rule 3.2 (lawyer shall make reasonable efforts 

to expedite litigation consistent with interests of client); Rule 8.4(d) (it is 

professional misconduct for lawyer to engage in conduct involving dishonesty, 

fraud, deceit or misrepresentation); and Rule 8.4(e) (it is professional misconduct 

for lawyer to engage in conduct prejudicial to administration of justice). 

Respondent also admits she has violated the following Rules for Lawyer 

Disciplinary Enforcement, Rule 413, SCACR: Rule 7(a)(1) (it shall be ground for 

discipline for lawyer to violate Rules of Professional Conduct) and Rule 7(a)(6) (it 

shall be ground for discipline for lawyer to violate oath of office contained in Rule 

4012(k), SCACR). 

Conclusion 

We accept the Agreement and suspend respondent from the practice of law for 

three (3) months. In addition, respondent shall complete the Legal Ethics and 

Practice Program Ethics School, Trust Account School, and Law Office 

Management School within one year prior to filing any Petition for Reinstatement. 

Within fifteen days of the date of this opinion, respondent shall file an affidavit 

with the Clerk of Court showing that she has complied with Rule 30 of Rule 413, 

SCACR. 

DEFINITE SUSPENSION. 

PLEICONES, C.J., BEATTY, KITTREDGE and HEARN, JJ., concur.