300 Ga. 655
Ga.2017Background
- Two State Bar formal complaints (SDB 6829, 6830) charged Morris P. Fair, Jr. with multiple violations of the Georgia Rules of Professional Conduct arising from two separate client matters.
- Fair failed to answer the complaints; the special master entered default judgment and treated the factual allegations as admitted.
- SDB 6829: Fair was retained in a 2008 construction dispute, failed to terminate representation while suspended, failed to respond to discovery and court motions, had client’s complaint struck, client sanctioned $28,195, and failed to return client property or communicate.
- SDB 6830: A criminal defense client paid about $1,500; Fair ceased representing the client without notice or court withdrawal, failed to communicate, did not timely deliver the file or refund fees, and falsely told the Bar he had filed a motion to withdraw.
- Special master found violations of Rules 1.2, 1.3, 1.4, 1.16(a), 1.16(d), 5.5(a), and 8.1(a); noted aggravators (prior discipline, pattern, multiple offenses, long experience) and no mitigating factors, and recommended disbarment.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether the admitted facts establish violations of the Rules of Professional Conduct | State Bar: default admits facts showing abandonment, lack of diligence, failure to communicate, unauthorized practice while suspended, failure to refund/return property, and false statements to the Bar | Fair: did not answer; no substantive defense presented | Court accepted special master’s conclusions that the admitted facts violated the listed Rules |
| Whether prior discipline and other factors support harsher sanction | State Bar: prior admonitions, suspensions, and pattern of misconduct justify disbarment | Fair: no responsive mitigation submitted | Court found aggravating factors (prior discipline, pattern, multiple offenses, experience) and no mitigation |
| Whether Bar Rule 4-103 (third/subsequent infraction) warrants disbarment | State Bar: third/subsequent infraction is discretionary ground for suspension or disbarment | Fair: no response | Court treated prior infractions as an aggravating factor supporting disbarment discretionarily |
| Appropriate sanction for the misconduct | State Bar: disbarment is appropriate given abandonment, harm to clients, and prior record | Fair: no argument presented | Court held disbarment appropriate and removed Fair’s name from the roll |
Key Cases Cited
- In the Matter of Hayes, 291 Ga. 90 (disbarment appropriate for attorney abandonment, failure to communicate, and causing prejudice)
- In the Matter of Weathington, 289 Ga. 19 (disbarment appropriate where attorney abandoned clients, failed to communicate, and failed to prepare competently)