This is an appeal from a March 24, 2003 order of the Superior Court of Bartow County in which respondent Mary A. Stearns “Stearns” was ordered to release a file relating to her representation of a former client, Laura E. Williams-Murphy “Williams-Murphy”, in an on-going suit and holding Stearns in contempt for disobeying an earlier court order instructing her to release the file. In several enumerations which run together as to substance, Stearns claims error in the superior court’s rulings. For the reasons that follow, we affirm the judgment of the court below. The instant case arose out of a divorce action. Initially, Stearns represented Williams-Murphy in said action and apparently compiled a sizeable file with regard thereto. In October of 2002, Williams-Murphy released Stearns as counsel of record and hired attorney Clarence Taylor to represent her in the divorce. Thereafter, beginning October 24, 2002, a series of communications began in which Taylor attempted to obtain Williams-Murphy’s divorce file from Stearns. From these communications, it appears that, although Williams-Murphy had paid Stearns $15,000 for representation and had received copies of some documents contained in the file, she still owed $2,000, and Stearns would not release her file without final payment. A letter from Stearns dated December 4, 2002, confirms that, the client owes us money and for us to release copies of the entire file the balance due would have to be paid. In addition, a voice mail message from Stearns’ billing manager stated that Williams-Murphy,
owes them an outstanding balance and, pursuant to Mary A. Stearns, the file would not be released until Ms. Murphy paid her balance in full. A final hearing on Williams-Murphy’s divorce was set for December 12, 2002. After several unsuccessful attempts to obtain the file, attorney Taylor sent Stearns a letter wherein he identified several examples of original documents contained in Williams-Murphy’s file that were not returned to her at the conclusion of Sterns’ representation and which were necessary for the impending litigation; these documents included Williams-Murphy’s father’s Last Will and Testament, a Quitclaim Deed, pleadings to several third parties, and responses to those pleadings. Attorney Taylor again requested the divorce file and notified Stearns of his intent to file a motion to compel if Williams-Murphy’s file was not released. The file was not forthcoming, and no response was made with regard to Taylor’s notice to Stearns of his intent to file a motion to compel.
