In the Matter of Joseph Arrington II

Joseph Arrington II, a Georgia lawyer admitted to the bar in 1996, was already suspended for failing to respond to a State Bar investigation. The State Bar accused him of paying his bar dues with a check from his trust account (the account lawyers must use to hold client and third-party money separately from their own), depositing personal funds into that account, making payments from it that looked like personal expenses, and repeatedly withdrawing small amounts of cash from it. Arrington never responded to the Bar's requests for admission, never showed up at the evidentiary hearing, and never communicated with the Bar or the special master. Because he did not participate, the facts alleged were deemed admitted. A special master recommended disbarment, and the Supreme Court of Georgia agreed, finding that Arrington had knowingly commingled personal and client funds and misused the trust account, and that his total failure to participate left no basis to impose anything less severe than disbarment.

The court held that Arrington's knowing commingling of personal and client funds and his repeated personal use of his trust account violated the Georgia Rules of Professional Conduct governing trust accounts, and that his complete failure to participate in the disciplinary process left no basis for any sanction other than disbarment.

The ruling reinforces that Georgia treats trust account misuse as one of the most serious forms of attorney misconduct, warranting disbarment especially when a lawyer refuses to respond to Bar proceedings, sending a clear signal to attorneys about the consequences of mishandling client funds.

Disbarred

1. The court applied Georgia's trust account rules (Rule 1.15(I)(a) and Rule 1.15(II)(b) of the Georgia Rules of Professional Conduct), which require lawyers to keep client and third-party funds separate from their own money and forbid depositing personal funds or making personal withdrawals from a trust account.
2. Because Arrington failed to respond to the Bar's requests for admission, the facts alleged, including that he deposited personal checks, made cash withdrawals, and paid personal expenses from his trust account, were legally deemed admitted.
3. The special master and the court weighed mitigating and aggravating factors under the ABA Standards for Imposing Lawyer Sanctions, finding Arrington's lack of a prior disciplinary record mitigating but his substantial legal experience and total refusal to participate in the process aggravating.
4. The court noted that trust account violations are treated as exceptionally serious, and that while some limited trust account violations can warrant a lesser sanction like a public reprimand, those cases involved attorneys who acknowledged wrongdoing or caused no client harm.
5. Because Arrington never participated in the disciplinary proceedings at all, the court found no basis to conclude any sanction short of disbarment was appropriate, following past cases where similar total non-participation led to disbarment.

• attorney disbarment
• trust account misuse
• State Bar of Georgia
• commingling client funds