Disbarred Lawyer Receives New Certification of Fitness to Practice Law
Georgia's high court said Monday that a disbarred attorney may be licensed to practice law in the Georgia, upon satisfaction of certain requirements.
November 06, 2018 at 11:04 AM
5 minute read
The Supreme Court of Georgia on Monday issued the following opinion in an attorney discipline matter:
In the Supreme Court of Georgia
Decided: November 5, 2018
S18Z1390. IN THE MATTER OF FREDDIE DARNELL HARRELL.
PER CURIAM.
This disciplinary matter is before the Court on the Application for Certification of Fitness to Practice Law, pursuant to Part A, Section 10 of the Rules Governing Admission to Practice Law in Georgia (the “Rules”), filed by Freddie Darnell Harrell. Harrell, who was originally admitted to the practice of law in 1987, was disbarred in 1995 for misconduct related to his representation of three individuals in criminal and civil proceedings, which conduct violated the following then-applicable Standards 3, 4, 22, 23, 44, 45, 61, 62, 63, 65, and 68 of Bar Rule 4-102.1 See In the Matter of Harrell, 265 Ga. 785, 785 (462 SE2d 753) (1995).
On November 26, 2016, Harrell filed the instant Application for Certification. Upon request by the Board to Determine Fitness of Bar Applicants (the “Board”), in December 2017, Harrell submitted a Statement of Rehabilitation in light of In re Cason, 249 Ga. 806 (294 SE2d 520) (1982), in which he admits that he failed to handle his clients' cases “in their best interest,” that he has “lived in shame knowing that it was [his] irresponsibility that caused [his] disbarment,” and that he has worked hard, helped others, and taken on a “useful and constructive place in society.” He further details his rehabilitation through his employment since his disbarment and his contributions to the community, including his support of an indigent family and his actions as president of his homeowners' association. Harrell also met with the Board in an informal conference and submitted numerous character references from family members, friends, and individuals in his community.
Pursuant to Part A, Section 10 (d) (1)–(4) of the Rules Governing Admission to the Practice of Law in Georgia, the Board provided notice and opportunity for the State Bar to present relevant information, provided notice to the Bar membership and Chief Judge where Harrell practiced, provided newspaper notice to the public in the area where Harrell practiced, and sought and received confirmation from the Client Security Fund that no restitution was due. The Client Security Fund responded that it paid no monies on claims filed against Harrell and that he owed no restitution. The President of the Troup County Bar Association responded that, although members of the Association that knew Harrell personally were shocked to see the grievances filed against him, the Association did not possess enough information one way or the other as to whether he was fit to practice law, but suggested that, if his conduct has been exemplary since his disbarment, it may be worth giving his Application some serious consideration. In addition, the State Bar responded that, at the time of Harrell's disbarment, four additional grievances were pending against him; that three of the grievances were transferred to moot status following his disbarment; that the fourth grievance was transferred to inactive status; and that the Bar did not intend to reactivate any of these matters in the event Harrell becomes eligible for readmission.
The Board, having met with Harrell and having considered the materials he submitted, issued its report on June 13, 2018, concluding that Harrell had, by clear and convincing evidence, carried his burden under Cason of demonstrating rehabilitation from his prior conduct and voted to grant certification of fitness to Harrell for readmission. The Board then filed its report and the record with this Court for final consideration.
Upon consideration of the entire record, we likewise conclude that Harrell has shown that he is entitled to be certified as fit to practice law in Georgia. Further, it appears that Harrell has met all of the procedural requirements of Part A, Section 10 for approval of his Application for Certification of Fitness. Accordingly, this Court hereby grants Harrell's Application for Certification of Fitness and orders that, upon satisfaction of all the requirements of Part B of the rules, including taking and passing the Georgia Bar Examination, Harrell may be reinstated as an attorney licensed to practice law in the State of Georgia.
Certificate of fitness for readmission granted. All the Justices concur, except Peterson, J., not participating.
1 In relevant part, Standard 3 prohibited engaging in illegal professional conduct involving moral turpitude; 4 prohibited engaging in professional conduct involving dishonesty, fraud, deceit, or wilful misrepresentation; 22 prohibited failing to follow the requirements for withdrawing from employment; 23 prohibited failing to refund an unearned fee upon withdrawal of employment; 44 prohibited wilfully abandoning or disregarding a legal matter; 45 prohibited knowingly engaging in illegal conduct or conduct contrary to a disciplinary rule; 61 required promptly notifying a client of the receipt of funds and delivering them to the client; 62 required properly identifying and labeling a client's funds; 63 required the maintenance of a complete record of all of a client's funds in the attorney's possession and to render appropriate accounts to the client regarding the funds; 65 prohibited commingling personal and client funds; and 68 required responding to disciplinary authorities.
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
NOT FOR REPRINT
© 2024 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.
You Might Like
View AllOn the Move: Hunton Andrews Kurth Practice Leader Named Charlotte Managing Partner
6 minute readPaul Weiss’ Shanmugam Joins 11th Circuit Fight Over False Claims Act’s Constitutionality
Atlanta Attorneys Rely on Google Earth, YouTube for Evidence in $6M Faulty Guardrail Settlement
Trending Stories
- 1Call for Nominations: Elite Trial Lawyers 2025
- 2Senate Judiciary Dems Release Report on Supreme Court Ethics
- 3Senate Confirms Last 2 of Biden's California Judicial Nominees
- 4Morrison & Foerster Doles Out Year-End and Special Bonuses, Raises Base Compensation for Associates
- 5Tom Girardi to Surrender to Federal Authorities on Jan. 7
Who Got The Work
Michael G. Bongiorno, Andrew Scott Dulberg and Elizabeth E. Driscoll from Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale and Dorr have stepped in to represent Symbotic Inc., an A.I.-enabled technology platform that focuses on increasing supply chain efficiency, and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The case, filed Oct. 2 in Massachusetts District Court by the Brown Law Firm on behalf of Stephen Austen, accuses certain officers and directors of misleading investors in regard to Symbotic's potential for margin growth by failing to disclose that the company was not equipped to timely deploy its systems or manage expenses through project delays. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Nathaniel M. Gorton, is 1:24-cv-12522, Austen v. Cohen et al.
Who Got The Work
Edmund Polubinski and Marie Killmond of Davis Polk & Wardwell have entered appearances for data platform software development company MongoDB and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The action, filed Oct. 7 in New York Southern District Court by the Brown Law Firm, accuses the company's directors and/or officers of falsely expressing confidence in the company’s restructuring of its sales incentive plan and downplaying the severity of decreases in its upfront commitments. The case is 1:24-cv-07594, Roy v. Ittycheria et al.
Who Got The Work
Amy O. Bruchs and Kurt F. Ellison of Michael Best & Friedrich have entered appearances for Epic Systems Corp. in a pending employment discrimination lawsuit. The suit was filed Sept. 7 in Wisconsin Western District Court by Levine Eisberner LLC and Siri & Glimstad on behalf of a project manager who claims that he was wrongfully terminated after applying for a religious exemption to the defendant's COVID-19 vaccine mandate. The case, assigned to U.S. Magistrate Judge Anita Marie Boor, is 3:24-cv-00630, Secker, Nathan v. Epic Systems Corporation.
Who Got The Work
David X. Sullivan, Thomas J. Finn and Gregory A. Hall from McCarter & English have entered appearances for Sunrun Installation Services in a pending civil rights lawsuit. The complaint was filed Sept. 4 in Connecticut District Court by attorney Robert M. Berke on behalf of former employee George Edward Steins, who was arrested and charged with employing an unregistered home improvement salesperson. The complaint alleges that had Sunrun informed the Connecticut Department of Consumer Protection that the plaintiff's employment had ended in 2017 and that he no longer held Sunrun's home improvement contractor license, he would not have been hit with charges, which were dismissed in May 2024. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Jeffrey A. Meyer, is 3:24-cv-01423, Steins v. Sunrun, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Greenberg Traurig shareholder Joshua L. Raskin has entered an appearance for boohoo.com UK Ltd. in a pending patent infringement lawsuit. The suit, filed Sept. 3 in Texas Eastern District Court by Rozier Hardt McDonough on behalf of Alto Dynamics, asserts five patents related to an online shopping platform. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Rodney Gilstrap, is 2:24-cv-00719, Alto Dynamics, LLC v. boohoo.com UK Limited.
Featured Firms
Law Offices of Gary Martin Hays & Associates, P.C.
(470) 294-1674
Law Offices of Mark E. Salomone
(857) 444-6468
Smith & Hassler
(713) 739-1250