In the Matter of Joseph Roger Davis
S20Y0752
| Ga. | Jun 21, 2021Background
- Davis (admitted 2005) was retained in Nov. 2018 to investigate outstanding arrest warrants and, if necessary, arrange for his client to surrender; client paid retainers.
- Davis failed to investigate, repeatedly told the client there were no warrants, missed a hearing, and failed to respond to the client’s inquiries; the client was arrested on Dec. 24, 2018 on preexisting warrants and remained jailed about seven weeks, suffering significant harm.
- After release the client sent a certified letter seeking an accounting and refund; Davis did not respond to the letter or to the client’s grievance to the State Bar.
- The State Bar personally served a Formal Complaint; Davis filed a notice of rejection but did not answer the complaint or oppose the State Bar’s motion for default; the special master found him in default and deemed the alleged facts admitted under Bar Rule 4-212(a).
- The special master found violations of Georgia Rules of Professional Conduct (including Rules 1.2(a), 1.3, 1.4(b), 1.5(a), 8.4(a)(4), and 9.3) and identified aggravating factors (dishonest motive, pattern of misconduct, refusal to acknowledge wrongdoing, substantial experience, prior admonition).
- The Court adopted the special master’s recommendation and ordered Davis disbarred for abandonment of a criminal-defense client and failure to respond to disciplinary authorities.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Appropriate sanction for attorney misconduct (client abandonment, misrepresentation, noncommunication) | State Bar: disbarment warranted given harms, dishonesty, and precedent | Davis: no substantive defense; failed to answer or contest | Court: disbarment affirmed as proper sanction |
| Effect of default on allegations | State Bar: default under Bar Rule 4-212(a) means facts/violations deemed admitted | Davis: filed notice of rejection but did not answer or oppose default | Court: default found; allegations deemed admitted |
| Whether specific Rule violations proven | State Bar: violations of Rules 1.2(a), 1.3, 1.4(b), 1.5(a), 8.4(a)(4), 9.3 established by admitted facts | Davis: no response or opposing factual showing | Court: held those violations proven (special master’s findings adopted) |
| Role of aggravating factors and precedent in sanctioning | State Bar: ABA Standards + aggravators (dishonesty, pattern, prior discipline) justify maximum sanction | Davis: no mitigation, refused to acknowledge misconduct | Court: aggravating factors present; sanction consistent with similar disbarment cases |
Key Cases Cited
- In the Matter of Morse, 266 Ga. 652 (1996) (court uses ABA Standards for Imposing Lawyer Sanctions)
- In the Matter of Powell, 310 Ga. 859 (2021) (disbarment for abandoning a client in a criminal matter and failing to respond to disciplinary authorities)
- In the Matter of Barton, 303 Ga. 818 (2018) (disbarment for abandoning criminal-defense clients and failing to respond to discipline)
- In the Matter of Brown, 294 Ga. 722 (2014) (disbarment for abandonment of multiple clients and failure to respond to disciplinary authorities)
- In the Matter of Evans, 289 Ga. 744 (2011) (disbarment for abandoning clients and failing to respond to discipline)