In re Jennings, 305 Ga. 133

Jack S. Jennings (Bar No. 390990) was the attorney of record in an estate matter; his client terminated him in March 2017 and retained new counsel.
After termination, Jennings refused to cooperate with substitution of counsel and delivered only a partial file omitting documents showing his failure to respond to requests for admission.
New counsel sought court assistance to obtain the file; Jennings failed to appear at the related hearing and disobeyed the court order to turn over the file and pay attorney fees.
The client filed a grievance in 2017; Jennings acknowledged a Notice of Investigation but did not file the required response, and likewise failed to respond to the State Bar's formal complaint, leading to facts and violations being deemed admitted by default.
The special master found violations of Georgia Rules of Professional Conduct (Rules 1.3, 1.4, 1.16(d), 3.2, and 9.3), identified multiple aggravating factors, and recommended disbarment; Jennings did not seek review or participate further.
The Supreme Court adopted the special master's recommendation and ordered Jennings disbarred for abandonment, concealment of misconduct, ignoring a court order, and refusing to participate in disciplinary proceedings.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether Jennings' abandonment and failure to cooperate warranted discipline	Jennings abandoned the client, withheld file materials, disobeyed court orders, and failed to participate in Bar proceedings; these facts warrant disbarment	Jennings did not file responses or appear to contest allegations (no substantive defense in record)	Court upheld disbarment for abandonment and related misconduct
Whether additional misconduct (concealment, ignoring court order) aggravates sanction	Concealment and refusal to comply with court-ordered fees show pattern and aggravation supporting disbarment	No contest offered; default deemed allegations admitted	Court found aggravating factors and increased sanction to disbarment
Appropriate sanction under Georgia disciplinary standards	ABA Standards and prior Georgia cases support disbarment for similar rule violations and patterns of neglect/abuse	No mitigating proof beyond no prior discipline; defendant did not timely seek review	Court accepted special master’s sanction of disbarment

In the Matter of Morse, 266 Ga. 652 (recognizing use of ABA Standards in lawyer discipline)
In the Matter of Barton, 303 Ga. 818 (disbarment for violations of Rules 1.3, 1.4, and 3.2)
In the Matter of Evans, 289 Ga. 744 (disbarment for multiple ethics violations including abandonment and failure to communicate)
In the Matter of Vogel, 279 Ga. 719 (disbarment for serious pattern of professional misconduct)