Ga. Supreme Court Disbars 1
Justices rule on report and recommendation of a special master.
February 04, 2019 at 12:12 PM
5 minute read
The Supreme Court of Georgia on Monday issued the following opinion regarding attorney discipline:
In the Supreme Court of Georgia
Decided: February 4, 2019
S19Y0498. IN THE MATTER OF JACK S. JENNINGS.
PER CURIAM.
This disciplinary matter involving Jack S. Jennings (State Bar No. 390990) is before the Court on the report and recommendation of the special master, LaRae D. Moore, recommending that the Court disbar Jennings for his abandonment of a legal matter entrusted to him and the subsequent pattern of misconduct that followed the initial abandonment of his client.
The record shows that after one of Jennings's former clients filed a grievance in 2017, the Investigative Panel issued a Notice of Investigation. Jennings acknowledged service of the Notice but failed to file a response as required by former Bar Rule 4-204.3 (a).1 After the State Bar filed its formal complaint in May 2018, this Court appointed a special master. Jennings was personally served with the formal complaint but failed to file a response as required by former Bar Rule 4-212 (a). As a result of his default, the facts alleged and violations charged were deemed admitted. Id.
The special master's thorough report found that Jennings, who was admitted to the Bar in 1987, was representing a client in an estate matter pending in court. Although the client terminated Jennings and retained new counsel in March 2017 and new counsel immediately sought to obtain the client file, Jennings failed to cooperate with the substitution of counsel and never provided the full file. Instead, Jennings provided a partial file that omitted documents showing that Jennings had failed to respond to requests for admission. New counsel was required to seek the court's assistance in obtaining the file, but Jennings failed to appear at the hearing scheduled on the matter, and even after the court ordered Jennings to turn over the file and to pay attorney fees, Jennings failed to comply with the court's order. By successfully filing a motion to withdraw the matters deemed admitted by Jennings's failures, the client's new counsel was able to mitigate the harm Jennings caused.
The special master concluded that by this conduct, Jennings violated Rules 1.3, 1.4, 1.16 (d), 3.2, and 9.3, of the Georgia Rules of Professional Conduct found in Bar Rule 4-102 (d) . The maximum sanction for a violation of Rule 1.3 is disbarment, and the maximum sanction for the other violations is a public reprimand. The special master considered the ABA Standards for Imposing Lawyer Discipline, see In the Matter of Morse, 266 Ga. 652, 653 (470 SE2d 232) (1996), and found the following aggravating factors present: the misconduct involved multiple violations; Jennings failed to comply with the rules and directions of the State Bar; Jennings refused to acknowledge the wrongful nature of his conduct; Jennings has substantial experience in the practice of law; and Jennings showed indifference to making restitution. See ABA Standard § 9.22. In mitigation, the special master noted that Jennings had no prior disciplinary record. Id. at § 9.23. The special master recommended disbarment as the appropriate sanction. Jennings did not seek review of the special master's report under former Bar Rule 4-217 (c) and has not filed a response in this Court.
Having considered the record, we concur with the special master's recommendation that disbarment is the appropriate sanction in this matter. In addition to abandoning the legal matter entrusted to him, Jennings intentionally concealed his misconduct, further harming his client, and then blatantly ignored the trial court's order to pay the court-ordered attorney fees for the trouble he caused. Finally, Jennings refused to participate in the disciplinary process. These facts, which show a pattern of misconduct, support the sanction of disbarment. See, e.g., In the Matter of Barton, 303 Ga. 818 (813SE2d 590) (2018) (disbarring lawyer for violations of Rules 1.3, 1.4, and 3.2); In the Matter of Evans, 289 Ga. 744 (715 SE2d 131) (2011) (disbarring lawyer for violations of Rules 1.1, 1.3, 1.4, 1.5, 1.16, 3.2, and 9.3); and In the Matter of Vogel, 279 Ga. 719 (620 SE2d 389) (2005) (disbarring lawyer for violations of Rules 1.2, 1.3, 1.4, 1.16, 3.2, and 9.3). Accordingly, we accept the special master's report and recommendation and hereby order that the name of Jack S. Jennings be removed from the rolls of persons authorized to practice law in the State of Georgia. Jennings is reminded of his duties pursuant to former Bar Rule 4-219 (c).2
Disbarred. All the Justices concur.
1 This Court issued an order on January 12, 2018, comprehensively amending Part IV of the Rules and Regulations for the Organization and Government of the State Bar of Georgia (“Bar Rules”); however, the former rules govern this matter.
2 Rule 4-219 (b) now states the requirements of former Bar Rule 4-219 (c).
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
- 1As 'Red Hot' 2024 for Legal Industry Comes to Close, Leaders Reflect and Share Expectations for Next Year
- 2Call for Nominations: Elite Trial Lawyers 2025
- 3Senate Judiciary Dems Release Report on Supreme Court Ethics
- 4Senate Confirms Last 2 of Biden's California Judicial Nominees
- 5Morrison & Foerster Doles Out Year-End and Special Bonuses, Raises Base Compensation for Associates
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