Oak Ridge attorney publicly censured in Tennessee Supreme Court for refusal of transferring client files

On Tuesday, November 15, 2022, the Supreme Court of Tennesee at Nashville ruled on charges of attorney discipline against Oak Ridge attorney Joe Richard Judkins. 

The case is styled ‘In the matter of Joe Richard Judkins’ with Case #M2022-01544-SC-BAR-BP.

The charges cited rules of professional conduct 1.16(d), Conduct 1.4, 8.4(a) and (d): 1.16(d).

The rules of professional conduct can be found here.

The following are as alleged and summarized from the filing.

This matter is before the Court upon a Petition for Discipline filed against Joe Richard Judkins on June 4, 2021; upon the Answer to the Petition for Discipline filed upon entry of a Conditional Guilty Plea filed by Mr. Judkin; upon an Order Recommending Approval of Conditional Guilty Plea entered; upon service of the Order Approving Conditional Guilty Plea on Mr. Judkins by the Executive Secretary of the Board of Professional Responsibility (“Board”); upon the Board to approve the Order Recommending Approval of Conditional Guilty Plea by the Hearing Panel, and upon the entire record in this cause.

The order states:

‘Mr. Judkins represented a client in a divorce action. Following a disagreement between the attorney and client, Mr. Judkins’ client discharged him and retained new counsel. Mr. Judkins refused to immediately transfer the client file to his client’s new counsel and asserted an attorney’s lien in the litigation and over the file materials, pursuant to Tennessee common law and Tennessee Code Annotated § 23-2-102, for the purpose of securing the payment of his fees and the reimbursement of his expenses for his service as counsel.’

The order continues:

‘Mr. Judkins additionally failed to adequately communicate with his client about the terms of the fees to be paid or the manner in which such fees would be paid failed to provide updates as to the accrual of fees at regular intervals during the representation, and did not notify his client as to the amount of fees owed until after his representation was terminated,’

The order further alleges that:

‘Finally, in an attempt to assert and defend his valid attorney’s lien for fees, Mr. Judkins sought and received permission from the Court to intervene in the litigation. Following his intervention, he attempted to participate in the litigation beyond the extent the Court deemed necessary to assert and defend his lien rights.

The Supreme Court of Tennesee at Nashville ruled against the respondent and ordered that the latter be publicly censured.

The Disposition states that:

“It is, therefore, considered, ordered, adjudged, and decreed by the court that: (1) Joe Richard Judkins is hereby publicly censured pursuant to Tenn. Sup. Ct. R. 9, § 12. 4.”

As of today, Mr. Judkins is listed on the website of the law firm, Judkins Law Firm as a practicing attorney. His info can be found online on Linkedin. He attended the University of Tennessee College of Law, graduating in 1977. Judkins practices in Oak Ridge, Tennessee. He has been licensed in Tennessee, license #5548.

A copy of the original filing can be found here.