Allison v. State
436 So.2d 792 (1983)
Premium Feature
Subscribe to Lexplug to listen to the Case Podcast.
Rule of Law:
Under Mississippi Supreme Court Rule 40, an attorney who perfects an appeal on behalf of a client has an independent duty to the court to either continue prosecuting the appeal or file a motion and obtain the court's permission to withdraw. An attorney who unilaterally abandons an appeal due to a client's failure to pay a fee violates this duty and may be held in contempt of court.
Facts:
- Attorney Cullen C. Taylor represented Lenzie Allison in a criminal trial, which resulted in a manslaughter conviction.
- Following the conviction, Taylor perfected an appeal to the Supreme Court of Mississippi on Allison's behalf.
- Taylor informed Allison that his fee to prosecute the appeal would be $3,000 and that an acceptable fee arrangement was required for him to proceed.
- Allison did not respond to the fee request or make any payment.
- Taylor sent letters to Allison on November 18 and December 1, 1982, stating that he would not work on the appeal without a fee and advising Allison to hire other counsel immediately.
- After sending the letters, Taylor took no further action to prosecute the appeal, nor did he file any motion with the court to withdraw from the case.
Procedural Posture:
- Attorney Cullen C. Taylor perfected an appeal for his client, Lenzie Allison, in the Supreme Court of Mississippi.
- Taylor failed to file the required assignment of errors and brief by the court's deadline.
- On June 1, 1983, the Supreme Court of Mississippi issued an order directing Taylor to show cause why he should not be held in contempt of court for his failure to prosecute the appeal.
- Taylor filed a written response to the show cause order on June 30, 1983, explaining the fee dispute with his client.
Premium Content
Subscribe to Lexplug to view the complete brief
You're viewing a preview with Rule of Law, Facts, and Procedural Posture
Issue:
Does an attorney who perfects a client's appeal but then takes no further action and fails to file a motion to withdraw, because the client has not paid the attorney's fee, violate his professional obligations to the court and thereby subject himself to a finding of contempt?
Opinions:
Majority - Robertson, Justice
Yes. An attorney who perfects an appeal but fails to prosecute it or seek permission to withdraw is in contempt of court. Mississippi Supreme Court Rule 40 imposes a dual responsibility on an attorney: a duty to the client and an independent duty to the court. Once an attorney perfects an appeal, they are obligated to continue its prosecution unless the court permits withdrawal. While a client's failure to pay a fee may be a valid reason for withdrawal, the attorney is not entitled to make that decision unilaterally. The attorney must file a motion seeking leave to withdraw, and it is for the court to determine if withdrawal is appropriate. Taylor's complete failure to either file the required briefs or seek permission to withdraw constituted a willful default of his obligations to the court.
Analysis:
This case establishes a bright-line rule for attorneys in Mississippi regarding their duties upon perfecting an appeal. It clarifies that the obligation to the court's procedural rules is distinct from and can supersede the attorney-client relationship, particularly in fee disputes. The decision serves as a powerful deterrent against attorneys abandoning cases without judicial oversight, thereby protecting the integrity of the appellate process and ensuring that clients' rights are not lost due to an attorney's unilateral action. It reinforces the principle that practicing law is a privilege that comes with professional responsibilities that transcend personal financial interests.
