Page 32 - 97006_HiRes

FINAL DISCIPLINARY ACTIONS
Suspensions
Jacob Richard Burns of Pascagoula,
Mississippi: A Complaint Tribunal
appointed by the Supreme Court of
Mississippi imposed a six (6) month
Suspension upon Mr. Burns in in Cause
No. 2024-B-568 for violations of Rules
1.3, 1.16(a)(3), 3.2, 3.4(c), 8.1(b) and 8.4(a)
and (d) of the Mississippi Rules of
Professional Conduct (MRPC).
The Mississippi Bar received infor-
mation from a United States District
Court Judge alleging that Mr. Burns
failed to: a) comply with discovery
requests, b) efficiently communicate
with the Court and counsel, and/or c)
appear at hearings in two (2) different
cases. As a result, an Informal [Bar]
complaint was filed by General Counsel
at the direction of the Committee on
Professional Responsibility. Additional
investigation resulted in the Bar becom-
ing aware of two (2) other cases where
Mr. Burns engaged in similar miscon-
duct. Despite proper notice, Mr. Burns
failed to respond to the informal [Bar]
complaint or the subsequent formal
complaint resulting in the entry of a
Default Judgment.
Rule 1.3, MRPC, which provides that
a lawyer is required to act with reason-
able diligence and promptness in rep-
resenting a client. Rule 1.16(a)(3), MRPC,
which provides that a lawyer shall with-
draw from the representation if the
lawyer is discharged. Rule 3.2, MRPC,
which provides that a lawyer shall make
reasonable efforts to expedite litiga-
tion consistent with the interests of the
client. Rule 3.4(c), MRPC, which pro-
vides that a lawyer is prohibited from
knowingly disobeying an obligation
under the rules of a tribunal. Rule 8.1(b),
MRPC, which provides that a lawyer in
connection with a disciplinary matter
shall not knowingly fail to respond to
a lawful demand for information from
an admissions or disciplinary authori-
ty. Rule 8.4(a), MRPC, which provides
that it is professional misconduct for a
lawyer to violate or attempt to violate
the rules of professional conduct. Rule
8.4(d), MRPC, which provides that it is
professional misconduct for a lawyer to
engage in conduct that is prejudicial to
the administration of justice.
Dexter Lamon Woodberry of
Hazlehurst, Mississippi: A Complaint
32 WINTER 2025
Tribunal appointed by the Supreme
Court of Mississippi imposed a six (6)
month Suspension upon Mr. Woodberry
in Cause No. 2024-B-00503 for vio-
lations of Rules 1.15(a), 1.15(b), 8.4(a)
and 8.4 (d) of the Mississippi Rules of
Professional Conduct (MRPC).
A client retained Mr. Woodberry to
represent him in a workers’ compen-
sation case. The client subsequently
entered into a Purchase Agreement
with a legal funding entity whereby
the client would be paid $4,000.00 in
exchange for a contingent right to a
portion of the proceeds from his work-
ers’ compensation claim. The Purchase
Agreement included an Irrevocable
Letter of Direction addressed to Mr.
Woodberry which provided in part
that Mr. Woodberry was to satisfy the
legal funding entity’s interest in the
settlement proceeds before deliv-
ering any money to the client. The
Purchase Agreement also included an
“Attorney Acknowledgement” which Mr.
Woodberry signed. Later the client set-
tled his workers’ compensation claim.
Mr. Woodberry received two checks
from the workers’ compensation carrier
as part of the settlement after which he
delivered the funds to the client without
satisfying the lien. At no time did Mr.
Woodberry set aside any money from
the proceeds he received from the
workers’ compensation carrier to sat-
isfy the lien. However, sometime after
the Bar filed the Formal Complaint, Mr.
Woodberry personally satisfied Legal
Funding’s lien.
Rule 1.15(a), MRPC, which provides
that a lawyer shall hold clients’ and third
persons’ property separate from the
lawyer’s own property. Funds shall be
kept in a separate trust account main-
tained in the state where the lawyer’s
office is situated, or elsewhere with the
consent of the client or third person.
Other property shall be identified as
such and appropriately safeguarded.
Complete records of such trust account
funds and other property shall be kept
and preserved by the lawyer for a peri-
od of seven years after termination of
the representation. Rule 1.15(b), MRPC,
which provides that upon receiving
funds or other property in which a cli-
ent or third person has an interest, a
lawyer shall promptly notify the client
or third person. Except as stated in this
Rule or otherwise permitted by law or
by agreement with the client, a lawyer
shall promptly deliver to the client or
third person any funds or other property
the client or third person is entitled to
receive and, upon request by the client
or third person, shall promptly render a
full accounting regarding such property.
Rule 8.4(a), MRPC, which provides that
it is professional misconduct for a law-
yer to violate or attempt to violate the
rules of professional conduct, knowingly
assisting or inducing another to do so,
or doing so through the acts of another.
Rule 8.4(d), MRPC, which provides that it
is professional misconduct for a lawyer
to engage in conduct that is prejudicial
to the administration of justice.
William Corban Gunn of Biloxi,
Mississippi: A Complaint Tribunal
appointed by the Supreme Court of
Mississippi imposed a six (6) month
suspension effective November 1, 2023,
including three (3) months of active
suspension followed by 3 months of
probation with Mr. Gunn eligible to
return to active status on February 1,
2024, when the attorney was reinstat-
ed. Subsequently a contempt action
was filed against Mr. Gunn based upon
where the Complaint Tribunal ordered
Mr. Gunn to be suspended for the
remaining three (3) months, effective
June 1, 2024, and requiring Mr. Gunn
to apply for reinstatement pursuant to
Rule 13 of the Rules of Discipline for
the Mississippi State Bar (MRD) before
returning to the active practice of law.
Mr. Gunn was ultimately found to have
violated Rules 1.3, 1.4(a), 1.15(a), 1.15(j),
8.1(a), 8.1(b), 8.4(c) and 8.4(d), MRPC.
On or about February 27, 2022,
an informal [Bar] complaint was filed
against Mr. Gunn by a client. The cli-
ent retained Mr. Gunn in late 2018 to
represent her in a lawsuit against a
Mississippi pharmacy. On January 11,
2019, Mr. Gunn filed the lawsuit in the
United States District Court for the
Southern District of Mississippi. The
parties initiated discovery, but the client
began to have difficulty communicat-
ing with Mr. Gunn after returning her
discovery responses to him. Mr. Gunn
failed to adequately communicate with
the client regarding the scheduling of
her deposition and the current status of
her lawsuit. The United States District