In re Harris
301 Ga. 378
| Ga. | 2017Background
- The State Bar filed a formal complaint alleging Jeffrey W. Harris mismanaged and misappropriated client trust funds in his real estate practice.
- Harris failed to file an answer and was found in default under Bar Rule 4-212(a), resulting in deemed admissions of the factual allegations and rule violations.
- In Jan–Feb 2015, Harris issued 19 checks from his attorney trust account when funds were insufficient; a bank notified the State Bar of the overdrafts.
- Harris deposited $12,500 of personal funds to cure account deficiencies but also made duplicate withdrawals of attorney fees and failed to maintain adequate trust-account records.
- The Special Master found violations of Rule 1.15(I) (misappropriation/commingling) and Rule 1.15(II) (trust-account recordkeeping), and, applying ABA Standards, recommended disbarment; Harris offered no mitigating explanation.
- The Court reviewed the record, agreed with the Special Master, and ordered Harris disbarred and removed from the rolls.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether Harris violated Rule 1.15(I) by misappropriating client trust funds | State Bar: Harris issued checks with insufficient trust-account funds and commingled client funds, constituting misappropriation | Harris did not respond (default) | Court: Violation admitted by default; misappropriation established |
| Whether Harris violated Rule 1.15(II) by failing to maintain trust-account records | State Bar: Harris failed to maintain adequate accounting and made duplicate withdrawals | Harris did not respond | Court: Violation admitted by default; recordkeeping violation established |
| Appropriate sanction for admitted violations of 1.15(I) and 1.15(II) | State Bar: Disbarment is appropriate given knowing conduct and client harm | Harris did not respond or offer mitigation | Court: Disbarment is appropriate; put weight on knowing conduct, injury/potential injury, and lack of mitigation |
| Effect of default on proceedings and evidence | State Bar: Default permits deemed admissions of allegations | Harris did not contest default | Court: Default sustained; deemed admissions control outcome and sanctions analysis |
Key Cases Cited
- In the Matter of Morse, 266 Ga. 652 (guidance on applying ABA Standards for sanctions)
- In the Matter of Rose, 299 Ga. 665 (disbarment affirmed for admitted trust-account violations where attorney offered no mitigation)
- In the Matter of Wathen, 290 Ga. 438 (disbarment for conversion of client funds and indifference to restitution)
- In the Matter of Goldberg, 281 Ga. 168 (disbarment following default and admitted violations of trust-account rules)