Lawyer Suspended For 'Intend[ing] To Incite Intensified Racial Conflict'

His social media posts were described as 'troubling.'

A lawyer is finally learning the lesson that posting harmful stuff on social media can impact your legal career.

Looks like there will actually be some consequences for South Carolina personal injury attorney David Traywick. Last June, we told you about Traywick’s frankly disturbing use of social media following the murder of George Floyd. He somehow decided it was acceptable to refer to Floyd as a shitstain in the following message that quickly made the rounds:

Back then, we didn’t hold out much hope that there’d be disciplinary action against Traywick, as a tipster pointed out South Carolina has not adopted the American Bar Association’s rule identifying harassment or discrimination as professional misconduct:

Unfortunately, SC has not adopted the ABA’s rule 8.4(g) so there’s very little the Bar can do to censure him, at present, though I expect they’ll be taking this rule up again soon. The alternative is getting his colleagues and potential clients to vote with their wallets…

However, after 46 complaints about Traywick’ Facebook page, which identified him as a lawyer and referenced his law firm, the South Carolina Supreme Court has suspended him for six months. He’ll also have to complete at least one hour of diversity education, undergo an anger management assessment, submit to an evaluation through the South Carolina Bar program Lawyers Helping Lawyers, and comply for one year with any treatment recommended by the assessments.

In the opinion, the South Carolina Supreme Court focused on the Floyd post and another about women who have tattoos, as described by the ABA Journal:

Sponsored

Traywick posted about tattoos April 5, 2020. First, he posted his theory about tattoos and challenged his readers to “Prove me wrong. Pro tip: you can’t.”

A reader suggested that Traywick instead prove that he was right. Traywick responded: “The general statement has exceptions, such as for bikers, sailors, convicts or infantry. But these college educated, liberal suburbanites. No, the rule was written for these boring motherf- – -ers. And they are everywhere. F- – em. Especially these females, Jesus Christ!”

The opinion called Traywick’s posts “troubling,” which, yes, very much so. They went on to note:

“These comments are not expressive; they are expressly incendiary. Both are statements by a lawyer on his social media account identifying him as such and listing the name of his law firm. The statements were intended to incite, and had the effect of inciting, gender and race-based conflict,” the state supreme court said.

“We are particularly concerned with the statement regarding Mr. Floyd. We find this statement was intended to incite intensified racial conflict not only in [Traywick’s] Facebook community but also in the broader community of Charleston and beyond. We hold this statement in particular tended to bring the legal profession into disrepute, violated the letter and spirit of the Lawyer’s Oath, and constitutes grounds for discipline.”

Traywick admitted to the misconduct and consented to a suspension of no longer than six months.


Sponsored

Kathryn Rubino is a Senior Editor at Above the Law, host of The Jabot podcast, and co-host of Thinking Like A Lawyer. AtL tipsters are the best, so please connect with her. Feel free to email her with any tips, questions, or comments and follow her on Twitter (@Kathryn1).