in the Matter of Sam Louis Levine, 303 Ga. 284

Sam Louis Levine, admitted 2004, faced three consolidated State Bar disciplinary complaints for neglecting two clients’ matters and extensive misconduct tied to his contentious divorce.
Levine failed to comply with Bar discovery, ignored hearings, and was found in default after the special master struck his answers, deeming the complaint facts admitted.
Client misconduct: (1) failed to file answers in five civil actions after receiving fees, causing defaults and wage garnishment; (2) neglected an auto-accident suit, mismanaged trial preparation, resisted co-counsel, and required a third lawyer to obtain a substantial settlement.
Divorce-related misconduct: while representing himself, Levine filed multiple meritless suits and complaints against judges, relatives, and his ex-wife; threatened judges; was held in contempt and jailed for refusing to comply with court orders; consent order required psychiatric exam.
Special master found violations of numerous Georgia Rules of Professional Conduct (including rules for competence, diligence, candor, communication, conflicts, and misconduct) and recommended disbarment based on aggravating factors and pattern of conduct; the Review Panel and Supreme Court adopted this and ordered disbarment.

Issue	Levine's Argument	State Bar's Argument	Held
Whether striking Levine’s pleadings and deeming complaint facts admitted was improper	Striking was improper; without default he should be allowed to present evidence	Levine willfully failed to respond to discovery and hearings; sanctions were justified	Court upheld striking and default; sanctions proper for discovery abuse
Whether special master had to issue a prior order compelling discovery before sanctions	A compel order was required before striking answers	No prior order required; rules permit sanctions for discovery failures	Court held no such prior order required; sanction authority affirmed
Whether sanction and disbarment appropriate given misconduct and mental health claims	Mitigating mental/emotional issues justify lesser sanction or different process	Pattern of deceit, obstruction, repeated offenses, and lack of proof of disability support disbarment	Court found aggravating factors predominant and disbarment warranted
Whether Levine’s procedural filings and collateral attacks required different treatment	Procedural objections and voluminous filings show contesting the proceedings	Filings were abusive, meritless, and obstructive	Court rejected procedural challenges and denied motions; disbarment affirmed

In the Matter of Burgess, [citation="293 Ga. 783"] (discussing striking answers for discovery failures)
In the Matter of Browning-Baker, [citation="292 Ga. 809"] (special master authorized to strike pleadings after discovery abuse and nonappearance)
In the Matter of Hawk, [citation="269 Ga. 165"] (facts deemed admitted after striking answers for discovery noncompliance)
In the Matter of Nicholson, [citation="299 Ga. 737"] (disbarment for filing false affidavit and pattern of outrageous conduct)
In the Matter of Koehler, [citation="297 Ga. 218"] (disbarment for repeated meritless claims and deceitful filings)
In the Matter of Minsk, [citation="296 Ga. 152"] (disbarment for knowingly false statements to client and tribunals)
In the Matter of Rolleston, [citation="282 Ga. 513"] (disbarment for persistent meritless filings and lack of remorse)