Changeflow GovPing Courts & Legal Attorney Scott L. Campbell Suspension Stayed Pr...
Priority review Enforcement Amended Final

Attorney Scott L. Campbell Suspension Stayed Probation

Favicon for www.courts.mo.gov MO Courts Attorney Discipline
Filed
Detected
Email

Summary

The Supreme Court of Missouri found that attorney Scott L. Campbell (Missouri Bar #37086) violated Rule 4.84(g) of the Rules of Professional Conduct and ordered a six-month license suspension, which was stayed in favor of a six-month probation period under Rule 5.175. Campbell was also taxed $1,500 in fees payable to the Clerk of this Court to the credit of the Advisory Committee Fund. The probation conditions are attached as a separate filing. The order was entered on 21 April 2026.

Why this matters

Missouri attorneys subject to stayed-suspension probation orders should carefully review the attached probation conditions filed separately under Rule 5.175, as violations during the probation period can trigger activation of the underlying six-month suspension. The specific prohibition under Rule 4.84(g) — which governs fee arrangements and improper financial relationships — suggests that practitioners should audit their fee agreements and any arrangements involving non-lawyer participation in legal fees.

AI-drafted from the source document, validated against GovPing's analyst note standards . For the primary regulatory language, read the source document .
Published by MO Courts on courts.mo.gov . Detected, standardized, and enriched by GovPing. Review our methodology and editorial standards .

About this source

GovPing monitors MO Courts Attorney Discipline for new courts & legal regulatory changes. Every update since tracking began is archived, classified, and available as free RSS or email alerts — 13 changes logged to date.

What changed

The Supreme Court of Missouri issued a final disciplinary order against attorney Scott L. Campbell, finding he violated Rule 4.84(g) of the Rules of Professional Conduct. The Court imposed a six-month license suspension, then stayed the suspension and substituted six months of supervised probation pursuant to Rule 5.175, with separate probation conditions attached to the order. A $1,500 fee under Rule 5.19(k) was also taxed to Campbell.

Missouri attorneys and legal professionals should note that a stayed suspension with probation is a substantive disciplinary outcome that leaves the license active but conditional. Any violation of probation conditions during the six-month period may result in activation of the underlying suspension. Practitioners should review their fee arrangements and client-related practices against Rule 4.84(g) to ensure ongoing compliance.

Penalties

$1,500 fee payable to the Clerk of the Supreme Court of Missouri to the credit of the Advisory Committee Fund

Archived snapshot

Apr 22, 2026

GovPing captured this document from the original source. If the source has since changed or been removed, this is the text as it existed at that time.

Supreme Court of Missouri
en banc

21 April 2026 Supreme Court of Missouri Case # SC101338 In re: Scott L. Campbell, Missouri Bar number 37086 ORDER Now at this day, this Court being sufficiently advised of and concerning the premises, the complete record before the Disciplinary Hearing Panel having been filed herein, and this cause having been fully briefed and argued, this Comt finds that Respondent, Scott L. Campbell, violated Rule 4.84(g) of the Rules of Professional Conduct and should be disciplined.
Upon consideration of these findings, previous decisions of this Court, ABA Standards for Imposing Lawyer Discipline, and aggravating and mitigating circumstances, the Court suspends Respondent's license for a period of six months from the date of this order. The suspension is stayed and Respondent is placed on probation for a period of six months from the date of this order in accordance with Rule 5.175. The conditions of probation are attached to this order.
Fee pursuant to Rule 5.19(k) in the amount of $1,500 payable to the Clerk of this Court to the credit of the Advisory Committee Fund taxed to Respondent.
Costs taxed to Respondent. Day - to – Day

Robin Ransom Acting Chief Justice Nickell and Hamilton, Sp.JJ., participating. Powell, C.J., and Fischer, J., not participating.

Note: To view any specific rule provisions cited in this order, please visit the pages for Supreme Court of Missouri Rule 4 and Rule 5. Please be aware the versions of the rules available online are those currently in effect and may have changed since this order issued.

Named provisions

Rule 4.84(g) Rule 5.175 Rule 5.19(k)

Get daily alerts for MO Courts Attorney Discipline

Daily digest delivered to your inbox.

Free. Unsubscribe anytime.

About this page

What is GovPing?

Every important government, regulator, and court update from around the world. One place. Real-time. Free. Our mission

What's from the agency?

Source document text, dates, docket IDs, and authority are extracted directly from MO Courts.

What's AI-generated?

The summary, classification, recommended actions, deadlines, and penalty information are AI-generated from the original text and may contain errors. Always verify against the source document.

Last updated

Classification

Agency
MO Courts
Filed
April 21st, 2026
Instrument
Enforcement
Branch
Judicial
Legal weight
Binding
Stage
Final
Change scope
Substantive
Docket
SC101338

Who this affects

Applies to
Legal professionals
Industry sector
5411 Legal Services
Activity scope
Professional license discipline Attorney probation Fee arrangement compliance
Geographic scope
US-MO US-MO

Taxonomy

Primary area
Judicial Administration
Operational domain
Legal
Topics
Consumer Protection Criminal Justice

Get alerts for this source

We'll email you when MO Courts Attorney Discipline publishes new changes.

Free. Unsubscribe anytime.

You're subscribed!