In the Matter of Willie George Davis, Jr

Willie George Davis, Jr. drafted his sister's will naming himself executor, guardian, and conservator without a bond, then failed to properly manage over $150,000 in life insurance proceeds and Social Security benefits meant for his orphaned nephew. After his nephew turned 18 and sought an accounting, a Cobb County probate court found Davis in contempt multiple times, jailed him, and ultimately entered judgments against him for nearly $200,000. The State Bar charged Davis with several rule violations, and he admitted to them in a petition asking for an 18-month suspension with conditions, including repaying his nephew before returning to practice. A Special Master recommended accepting that deal, and the State Bar did not object. The Supreme Court of Georgia rejected the petition anyway, ruling that the conditions could trap Davis in suspension for decades given his slow repayment rate, which would not serve the disciplinary system's real purposes of protecting the public and its confidence in lawyers.

The court held that a suspension conditioned only on completing restitution payments, without any time limit or requirement to recertify fitness and competence, is unacceptable because it could functionally extend the suspension for decades and fails to serve the disciplinary system's goals of protecting the public and public confidence in the legal profession.

The ruling signals that Georgia courts will not approve attorney discipline that ties reinstatement so tightly to open-ended restitution that it could effectively become a permanent, unreviewed suspension. It protects both the disciplined lawyer's due process interests and the public's confidence in periodic review of attorney fitness.

Petition for voluntary discipline rejected

1. The court explained that when reviewing a lawyer's petition for voluntary discipline, it looks to the ABA Standards for Imposing Lawyer Sanctions, considering the duty violated, the lawyer's mental state, any injury caused, and aggravating or mitigating factors.
2. The Special Master found Davis violated multiple duties, including failing to preserve his nephew's property, having an unwaived conflict of interest in drafting a will naming himself fiduciary, and showing a lack of diligence, competence, and candor toward his nephew, the probate court, and the State Bar.
3. Aggravating factors included prior discipline, multiple rule violations, obstructing the disciplinary process, victimizing a vulnerable orphaned minor, and substantial legal experience, while mitigating factors included personal grief, partially untreated mental illness, and some positive community involvement.
4. The court noted that the recommended discipline, an 18-month suspension that converts to an indefinite suspension until restitution and mental fitness conditions are met, could keep Davis suspended for roughly 50 years given his current repayment rate of $300 per month, far exceeding suspensions the court has ever approved outside reciprocal discipline cases.
5. The court reasoned that such an open-ended suspension would not adequately serve the purposes of protecting the public from unqualified attorneys and preserving public confidence in the legal system, especially since it would let Davis skip the recertification and re-examination process required of disbarred lawyers seeking readmission.
6. Because the proposed conditions could place Davis in a permanent disciplinary limbo without meaningful review of his fitness to practice, the court concluded it must reject the petition rather than accept an unacceptable sanction.

• attorney suspension
• estate mishandling
• conservatorship
• probate court contempt
• State Bar discipline