In Re Brown, 289 Ga. 912

Brown has been suspended from practicing law since February 1, 2010 after the Court’s order for failure to respond adequately to a Notice of Investigation.
The State Bar filed discipline notices addressing two matters and later a formal complaint addressing those two plus a third; a Rule 4-106 petition addressed a misdemeanor conviction for theft of services.
Brown initially petitioned for voluntary discipline and later amended to address four additional matters, including the misdemeanor conviction; the Bar did not object to hearing all seven matters together.
The special master found misconduct in eight areas across seven matters, including abandonment of six clients, accepting representations outside competence, travel burdens due to transportation issues, moving out-of-state without proper withdrawal, failing to return client files or unearned fees, and issues with withdrawing from representation.
In the 2008–2009 conduct as a public defender and private practitioner, Brown acknowledged certain arrangements with an inmate for calls, with costs billed to another number.
The Court adopted the special master’s findings and concluded disbarment is the appropriate sanction, noting multiple offenses and the need to protect the public and maintain professional confidence.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether disbarment is appropriate for seven disciplinary matters.	Bar supported disbarment given multiple serious offenses.	Brown argued for lesser sanctions or voluntary discipline, challenging the severity.	Disbarment is appropriate.
Whether abandonment of clients and failure to return files/fees justify disbarment.	Conduct shows gross incompetence and ethical breaches warrant disbarment.	Mitigating circumstances reduce culpability and sanction could be lesser.	Yes, supports disbarment.
Whether pattern and magnitude of misconduct justify severe discipline despite mitigation.	Multiple offenses and pattern support disbarment for public protection.	Remorse and lack of prior discipline should weigh in favor of less.	Disbarment warranted.
Whether the record reflects responsible withdrawal and client file handling appropriate to ethical standards.	Record demonstrates persistent withdrawal failures and mismanagement.	Brown claimed lack of knowledge about withdrawal procedures.	Record supports disbarment.

In the Matter of Ortman, 289 Ga. 130 (2011) (disbarment appropriate for multiple offenses)
In the Matter of Evans, 289 Ga. 744, 715 S.E.2d 131 (2011) (disbarring attorney who abandoned clients and failed to return files)