In Re Manning-Wallace, 291 Ga. 96

Respondent Nerrylle Manning-Wallace, a Georgia attorney, faced disciplinary action based on prior proceedings and new findings of dishonesty in a personal injury case.
A special master recommended disbarment for violations of Rules 3.3(a)(4) and 3.4(b)(1) of the Georgia Rules of Professional Conduct (Bar Rule 4-102(d)).
The Supreme Court previously rejected Respondent's first petition for voluntary discipline in 2010, recounting that she had fabricated documents used as evidence in a damages claim.
Evidence at evidentiary hearings (2011) showed Respondent either created or caused the creation of fabricated documents and lied about it in the disciplinary proceedings.
The Court agreed with the master that Respondent violated Rules 3.3(a)(1) and 3.4, rejected mitigating factors, and disbarred Respondent; she was reminded of Bar Rule 4-219(c).
All Justices concur

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether Respondent violated Rule 3.3(a)(1) by offering false evidence.	Respondent admitted fabrication in prior petitions but contested ongoing wrongdoing.	Respondent denied misconduct during hearings.	Yes; violated Rule 3.3(a)(1).
Whether Respondent violated Rule 3.4 by creating false documents.	Respondent created or caused fabrication of documents.	Respondent denied creating false documents.	Yes; violated Rule 3.4.
Whether disbarment is the appropriate sanction.	Mitigating factors unpersuasive; disbarment warranted.	—	Disbarment appropriate.

In the Matter of Friedman, 270 Ga. 5 (Ga. 1998) (dishonesty during disciplinary proceedings warrants severe discipline)
In the Matter of Shehane, 276 Ga. 168 (Ga. 2003) (deliberate false statements to clients and authorities not tolerated; warrants disbarment)