In the Matter of Tony C. Jones

This disciplinary matter is before the Court on the report and recommendation from special master James W. Hurt, recommending that the Court accept the petition for voluntary discipline filed by Respondent Tony C. Jones State Bar No. 403935 and impose on Jones an additional 12-month suspension with conditions on reinstatement. Jones, who has been a member of the Bar since 1984, currently is suspended from the practice of law pursuant to two Supreme Court opinions, the first of which suspended him for 18 months with reinstatement conditioned on him repaying his client the full judgment entered against him, see In the Matter of Jones, 289 Ga. 835 716 SE2d 222 2011 “Jones I”, and the second imposing an additional six-month suspension with conditions on reinstatement in order to resolve three additional client grievances, see In the Matter of Jones, 292 Ga. 310 736 SE2d 432 2013 “Jones II” reinstatement conditioned on repaying fees to one client, submitting a second matter to fee arbitration, and providing psychologist/psychiatrist’s certification that Jones is fit to return to the practice of law. The State Bar is not opposed to the petition, and we agree that the requested punishment is sufficient given the facts of this case.

In the petition for voluntary discipline, which seeks to resolve three separate disciplinary matters, Jones admits that, with regard to State Disciplinary Board “SDB” Docket No. 6484, in or around January 2011 he was retained to defend a client against criminal charges and was paid $4,000 for the representation. When Jones was suspended on October 3, 2011, he contacted the client and informed him that he could no longer provide the representation. Jones offered to refund any unearned fees, but was unable to do so before the client filed a grievance with the State Bar. Although the Investigative Panel properly served Jones with the Notice of Investigation, he failed to timely respond, thereby violating Rule 9.3 of the Georgia Rules of Professional Conduct, see Bar Rule 4-102 d. Thereafter, Jones resolved the refund matter with his client.