Georgia Supreme Court Disbars 1
One attorney discipline opinion was issued Thursday by the court.
March 26, 2020 at 02:59 PM
4 minute read
The Supreme Court of Georgia on Thursday issued the following attorney discipline opinion.
Decided: March 26, 2020
S20Y0421. IN THE MATTER OF MARTA MARIA NORIEGA-ALLEN.
PER CURIAM.
This disciplinary matter is before the Court on a Notice of Discipline seeking the disbarment of Marta Maria Noriega-Allen (State Bar No. 356678), who was admitted to the Bar in 2007. The State Bar attempted to serve Noriega-Allen personally at the address listed with the State Bar, but the sheriff filed a return of service non est inventus. The State Bar then properly served her by publication pursuant to Bar Rule 4-203.1 (b) (3) (ii), but she failed to file a Notice of Rejection. Therefore, she is in default, has waived her right to an evidentiary hearing, and is subject to such discipline and further proceedings as may be determined by this Court. See Bar Rule 4-208.1 (b).
The facts, as deemed admitted by virtue of Noriega-Allen's default, show that a client retained her to represent him in a divorce action and paid her $29,922.50 in retainer funds. Initially, Noriega-Allen provided monthly invoices, which, as of September 2014, showed that she had earned $12,866. After the divorce matter settled in September 2015, the parties agreed to have the trial court decide the issue of attorney fees. However, Noriega-Allen failed to file a motion for fees on her client's behalf, failed to respond to the motion for fees filed by her client's ex-wife, failed to appear at the hearing on the issue of fees,1 failed to respond to her client's numerous requests for information about the balance owed from the remaining retainer funds, failed to return or account for the unearned balance, and moved to Maine without providing contact information. After her client filed his grievance with the Bar, Noriega-Allen failed to respond to the grievance and failed to acknowledge service of the Notice of Investigation or respond to it. As a result of her failure to respond, this Court entered an order of suspension. See In the Matter of Noriega-Allen, S20Y0043 (August 12, 2019).
Based on these facts, the Disciplinary Board found probable cause to believe that Noriega-Allen violated Rules 1.2 (a), 1.3, 1.4, 1.5, 1.15 (I), 1.15 (II), 1.16 (d), and Rule 3.2 of the Georgia Rules of Professional Conduct found in Bar Rule 4-102 (d). The maximum sanction for a violation of Rules 1.2 (a), 1.3, 1.15 (I), and 1.15 (II) is disbarment, and the maximum sanction for a violation of Rules 1.4, 1.5, 1.16 (d), and 3.2 is a public reprimand.
The Board, relying on the ABA Standards for Imposing Lawyer Sanctions as instructive, see In the Matter of Morse, 266 Ga. 652 (470 SE2d 232) (1996), found the following factors in aggravation: dishonest or selfish motive, multiple offenses, substantial experience in the practice of law, and indifference to making restitution, see ABA Standard 9.22 (b), (d), (i), and (j), and only one factor in mitigation: absence of a prior disciplinary record, see ABA Standard 9.32 (a).
Having reviewed the record, we conclude that disbarment is the appropriate sanction in this matter. Accordingly, it is hereby ordered that the name of Marta Maria Noriega-Allen be removed from the rolls of persons authorized to practice law in the State of Georgia. Noriega-Allen is reminded of her duties pursuant to Bar Rule 4-219 (b).
Disbarred. Melton, C. J., Nahmias, P. J., and Blackwell, Boggs, Peterson, Warren, Bethel, and Ellington, JJ., concur.
1 The State Bar's Notice of Discipline does not indicate whether or not the client was harmed by Noriega-Allen's failure to respond on his behalf on the issue of attorney fees in the divorce action.
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
- 1Litigation Leaders: Greenspoon Marder’s Beth-Ann Krimsky on What Makes Her Team ‘Prepared, Compassionate and Wicked Smart’
- 2A Look Back at High-Profile Hires in Big Law From Federal Government
- 3Grabbing Market Share From Rivals, Law Firms Ramped Up Group Lateral Hires
- 4Navigating Twitter's 'Rocky Deal Process' Helped Drive Simpson Thacher's Tech and Telecom Practice
- 5Public Notices/Calendars
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