Georgia CommonsBuscar en todas las colecciones
Buscar en Georgia Commons
Proyectos de ley, opiniones de la Corte Suprema, el Código y las dos constituciones, y transcripciones de las reuniones de la Cámara y el Senado, en una sola búsqueda. Pregunte con palabras sencillas: la búsqueda ordena los pasajes por su significado y también por sus palabras.
Filtros:Supreme Court of Georgia 2024 Quitar filtros
Se encontraron 95 documentos.
Opinión de la Corte Suprema · Supreme Court of Georgia · 1 de octubre de 2024
In THE MATTER OF JOHN L.G. HERBERT, JR. (Four Cases)
Resumen de Georgia Commons (escrito con IA): La Corte Suprema de Georgia inhabilitó al abogado John L. G. Herbert, Jr. tras incurrir en rebeldía frente a cargos disciplinarios que lo acusaban de tomar aproximadamente $850,000 confiados por inversionistas inmobiliarios extranjeros.
2 This Rule provides, in pertinent part, that “a lawyer shall . . . keep the client reasonably informed about the status of the matter . . . [and] promptly comply with reasonable requests for information.” 3 This Rule provides that “[a] lawyer shall not make an agreement for, charge, or collect an unreasonable fee or an unreasonable amount for expenses,”...
7 This Rule provides, in pertinent part, that “[a]ll funds held by a lawyer for a client and all funds held by a lawyer in any other fiduciary capacity shall be deposited in and administered from a trust account.” 8 This Rule provides, in pertinent part, that “[n]o funds shall be withdrawn from such trust accounts for the personal use of the lawyer...
Opinión de la Corte Suprema · Supreme Court of Georgia · 15 de octubre de 2024
RBC GLOBAL ASSET MANAGEMENT (U.S.) INC. v. LATTIMORE
Resumen de Georgia Commons (escrito con IA): La Corte Suprema de Georgia revocó una sentencia en rebeldía de $20 millones contra una asesora de inversiones, al fallar que la mujer que cobraba la sentencia usó el formulario de embargo equivocado porque la empresa no es una 'institución financiera' según la ley de Georgia.
mutual fund, or other organization held out to the public as a place of deposit of funds or medium of savings or collective investment. OCGA § 18-4-1 (4). The definition of “financial institution” does not include “registered investment advisors.” In fact, the Georgia Uniform Securities Act of 2008 defines “investment adviser” to specifically exclude a...
6 Pursuant to Securities and Exchange Commission regulations (Rules and Regulations, Investment Advisers Act of 1940), Global may have “deemed custody” of portfolios or funds that it manages, even though those funds are held by others. “Deemed custody” is a term of art used to indicate managerial control of the funds for investment purposes, not actual...
Opinión de la Corte Suprema · Supreme Court of Georgia · 20 de febrero de 2024
In THE MATTER OF DEIRDRE MARIA STEPHENS (Two Cases)
Resumen de Georgia Commons (escrito con IA): La Corte Suprema de Georgia ordenó la inhabilitación de la abogada Deirdre Maria Stephens, rechazando una recomendación más leve de suspensión de seis meses tras determinar que mintió repetidamente a un tribunal de primera instancia sobre la ubicación de $80,000 en fondos de un cliente.
1. Special Master’s Report (a) Findings of Fact Regarding State Disciplinary Board Docket (“SDBD”) No. 7488, the Special Master made the following findings of fact. On May 2, 2018, a $700 check was presented on Stephens’s trust account, but there were insufficient funds available to cover the check. The reason for the overdraft was that Stephens did not...
Stephens testified that she disbursed the $75,000 to the client almost immediately after she received the funds into her bank account and when she paid him there was no indication of any claim by the LLC owner to the money or the possibility of any return of funds. The State Bar offered no evidence to the contrary, and the record did not pinpoint the exact...
Opinión de la Corte Suprema · Supreme Court of Georgia · 11 de junio de 2024
In the Matter of Diana Y. McDonald
Resumen de Georgia Commons (escrito con IA): La Corte Suprema de Georgia inhabilitó a una abogada independiente que mintió a la contraparte de una clienta y al Colegio de Abogados del Estado sobre $4 millones guardados en su cuenta fiduciaria mientras gastaba en secreto gran parte de ese dinero en sí misma.
Rule 1.8 (e) — Advancing Money to a Client In considering the alleged violation of Rule 1.8 (e) (lawyer shall not provide financial assistance to a client in connection with pending or contemplated litigation with certain exceptions for costs and expenses), the Special Master noted that McDonald admitted she provided financial assistance to a bankruptcy...
The Special Master noted that, here, McDonald knew that entitlement to the entire $4,000,000 was being claimed by the third party, but she did not voluntarily return any of the money until after the third party filed its grievance and federal lawsuit (and the federal court ordered her to pay the money into the court’s registry). And even then, she only paid...
Opinión de la Corte Suprema · Supreme Court of Georgia · 15 de octubre de 2024
In the Matter of William Slater Vincent
Resumen de Georgia Commons (escrito con IA): La Corte Suprema de Georgia aceptó la petición de disciplina voluntaria de un abogado del área de Fulton por violaciones a su cuenta fiduciaria, y ordenó una amonestación pública en lugar de la suspensión que había solicitado el Colegio de Abogados del Estado.
PER CURIAM. This disciplinary matter is before the Court on William Slater Vincent’s (State Bar No. 727801) second amended petition for voluntary discipline filed before the issuance of a formal complaint. See Bar Rule 4-227 (b).1 In his second amended petition, Vincent2 admits that he violated Rules 1.15 (II) (a)3 and 1.15 (III) (b)4 of the Georgia Rules...
Separately, Vincent admits that he violated Rule 1.15 (III) (b) by “failing to ensure that his Business Checking Preferred account . . . had a description which complied with” Rule 1.15 (III) (b) by identifying it as an “Attorney Trust Account” on statements, checks, and deposit slips. Vincent admits that he failed to take notice that the account...
Opinión de la Corte Suprema · Supreme Court of Georgia · 13 de agosto de 2024
In the Matter of Anthony O. Van Johnson
Resumen de Georgia Commons (escrito con IA): La Corte Suprema de Georgia aceptó la entrega voluntaria de la licencia de un abogado del área de Atlanta después de que admitió falsificar la firma de una clienta en un cheque de acuerdo, quedarse con su dinero y abandonar los casos de otros clientes.
3 Rule 1.15 (I) provides: (a) A lawyer shall hold funds or other property of clients or third persons that are in a lawyer’s possession in connection with a representation separate from the lawyer’s own funds or other property. Funds shall be kept in one or more separate accounts maintained in an approved institution as defined by Rule 1.15 (III) (c) (1)....
(i) A statutory lien; (ii) A final judgment addressing disposition of those funds or property; or (iii) A written agreement by the client or the lawyer on behalf of the client guaranteeing payment out of those funds or property. The lawyer may disregard the third person’s claimed interest if the lawyer reasonably concludes that there is a valid defense to...
Opinión de la Corte Suprema · Supreme Court of Georgia · 2 de julio de 2024
In the Matter of Susan Michele Brown
Resumen de Georgia Commons (escrito con IA): La Corte Suprema de Georgia rechazó una petición de la abogada Susan Brown para aceptar una sanción disciplinaria por su conducta como administradora de un fideicomiso, al resolver que las normas de ética que supuestamente violó no alcanzan a una abogada que actúa puramente como fiduciaria fuera del ejercicio de la abogacía.
type of trust account from which a lawyer should administer the identified funds, dictates certain recordkeeping requirements, and sets out rules prohibiting commingling a lawyer’s personal funds with other funds in her possession and prohibiting the lawyer’s withdrawal of those funds for her own personal use (with some exceptions). With that overview, we...
By its plain terms, subsection (a) broadly applies to lawyers “who practice[ ] law in Georgia,” but it does not make clear by its express terms whether it applies only to funds or property obtained by a lawyer in the course of a legal representation of a client. Insofar as the subsection references a lawyer receiving money or property or holding funds “on...
Opinión de la Corte Suprema · Supreme Court of Georgia · 19 de noviembre de 2024
In the Matter of Christian Aaron Coomer
Resumen de Georgia Commons (escrito con IA): La Corte Suprema de Georgia aceptó una suspensión de dos años de la licencia de abogado para Christian Aaron Coomer, un exjuez de la Corte de Apelaciones, por conflictos de interés y tratos financieros con un cliente de edad avanzada.
In late 2017, Coomer began to borrow money from Filhart. In December 2017, Filhart loaned $80,000 to CAC Holdings, LLC (“CAC”), a limited liability company of which Coomer was the sole member. Coomer presented Filhart a promissory note (“First Promissory Note”), promising to repay the loan in monthly installments with the last installment due in December...
7 Coomer stated that he was involved in some of these activities before 2023, but that his work with the veterans’ groups and the retired men’s groups began after he was removed from the bench. testified that he has kept up with his continuing legal education requirements and has signed up for courses relevant to the issues he faced in this matter. In an...
Opinión de la Corte Suprema · Supreme Court of Georgia · 31 de octubre de 2024
Jones v. City of Atlanta
Resumen de Georgia Commons (escrito con IA): La Corte Suprema de Georgia dictaminó que un tribunal de primera instancia desestimó indebidamente la demanda de un residente que alegaba que el departamento de agua de Atlanta traslada impuestos ocultos a los clientes mediante dos ordenanzas municipales, y devolvió el caso para una revisión adecuada.
2. The City’s 2014 Revenue Manual. Appellant also attached to his Complaint excerpts from the City’s 2014 Revenue Manual. The 2014 Revenue Manual divides the City’s “revenues and sources of income” into various categories, including “taxes” and “charges for services,” and it categorizes the PILOT and Franchise Fee as taxes. The 2014 Revenue Manual further...
4. Testimony of Mohamed Balla on behalf of the City. In further support of his claims, Appellant attached to his Complaint two excerpts of testimony by Mohamed Balla regarding DWM’s finances. The first excerpt contains Balla’s testimony before 6 Though “the judgment of the superior court confirming and validating the issuance of the bonds and the security...
Opinión de la Corte Suprema · Supreme Court of Georgia · 30 de abril de 2024
City of Atlanta v. 400 Edgewood, LLC
Resumen de Georgia Commons (escrito con IA): La Corte Suprema de Georgia negó revisar una disputa sobre una gasolinera a la que un tribunal municipal de Atlanta ordenó agregar cámaras de seguridad y reducir su horario, dejando en pie un fallo de que el tribunal se excedió en su poder.
MCMILLIAN, Justice, concurring in the denial of certiorari. This case turns on whether it is within the jurisdiction of a municipal court to order the owner of a gas station and convenience store to make various changes to its security and operations, after the City of Atlanta asked that court to abate an alleged public nuisance on the owner’s property. I...
Wolcott supports that the relief granted in this case is also “beyond the power of the municipal court.” 240 Ga. at 245. Here, the City of Atlanta originally filed a complaint in rem to abate an alleged public nuisance on the owner’s property, requesting the municipal court to ‘“close and immediately secure the Property so that it cannot be used in...
Opinión de la Corte Suprema · Supreme Court of Georgia · 17 de enero de 2024
In THE MATTER OF DERRIC CROWTHER (Two Cases)
Resumen de Georgia Commons (escrito con IA): La Corte Suprema de Georgia inhabilitó al abogado Derric Crowther, rechazando la recomendación de una junta de revisión de una suspensión de cuatro años por manejo indebido de fondos de acuerdos de clientes y por violar reglas de contabilidad fiduciaria en dos casos distintos.
2. Special Master’s Report and Recommendation (a) SDBD No. 7390 In 2006, the client filed a pro se medical malpractice action against a Macon hospital on behalf of herself, her siblings, and as the administratrix of her mother’s estate (collectively, “plaintiffs”), alleging malpractice by the hospital’s nurses in connection with her mother’s death. Crowther...
In 2012, Crowther learned from a new expert that the nurses had not actually deviated from the applicable standard of care. He pursued settlement with the hospital, and the parties settled in August 2012. The hospital issued two checks totaling $187,500, with a $7,500 check paid directly to a defense expert and the remaining $180,000 paid to the order of...
Opinión de la Corte Suprema · Supreme Court of Georgia · 29 de mayo de 2024
JOHN DA GROSA SMITH v. RYAN MILLSAP
Resumen de Georgia Commons (escrito con IA): La Corte Suprema de Georgia se negó a revisar un fallo de la Corte de Apelaciones sobre el desembolso de fondos en disputa que estaban en manos de un tribunal de primera instancia, con una opinión concurrente que explicaba por qué la decisión del tribunal inferior era demasiado limitada para plantear una cuestión legal seria.
PETERSON, Presiding Justice, concurring. John Smith’s certiorari petition raises an issue of possible gravity: whether the broad power of trial courts to order disputed funds to be paid into the registry of the court pending resolution of the dispute includes an equally broad power to disburse funds from the registry before the dispute has been resolved....
319 Ga. 175 FINAL COPY S24C0302. SMITH et al. v. MILLSAP et al. ORDER OF THE COURT. The Supreme Court today denied the petition for certiorari in this case. All the Justices concur.
Opinión de la Corte Suprema · Supreme Court of Georgia · 17 de septiembre de 2024
In THE MATTER OF CORY D. RAINES (Two Cases)
Resumen de Georgia Commons (escrito con IA): La Corte Suprema de Georgia inhabilitó al abogado Cory D. Raines tras incurrir en rebeldía en dos casos disciplinarios que lo acusaban de malversar fondos de acuerdos de clientes, incluido dinero adeudado a dos hermanos menores de edad y a una clínica médica.
State Disciplinary Board Docket (“SDBD”) No. 7694 and No. 7695, Raines was served by publication on July 5, 2023. Raines failed to file answers to the formal complaints, and on August 28, the State Bar filed a motion for default in these matters pursuant to Bar Rule 4-212 (a). Raines did not respond to this motion. However, on October 12, Raines...
5 SDBD No. 7694 corresponds to Case No. S24Y0997. siblings’ claims — Raines issued checks from his personal operating account to the siblings for $14,907.72 and $12,930.96; Raines did not disburse the funds to the siblings from his IOLTA account, nor did he satisfy the third-party interests in the settlement funds, as he failed to pay the hospital. Based on...
Opinión de la Corte Suprema · Supreme Court of Georgia · 27 de junio de 2024
White v. State
Resumen de Georgia Commons (escrito con IA): La Corte Suprema de Georgia confirmó las condenas de Erica White por asesinato y RICO por la muerte por envenenamiento con codeína de su hijo de dos años con discapacidad, rechazando reclamos sobre pruebas indebidas, falta de separación de cargos, defectos en la acusación, asistencia legal ineficaz y evidencia ocultada.
furtherance of White and Schullerman’s scheme to financially exploit Tyrael in death. In March 2013, White submitted a grant application to the Brain and Spinal Injury Trust Fund Commission, which provides grants to Georgians who have suffered traumatic brain and spinal cord injuries, in which she falsely represented her total monthly income. Additionally,...
(b) White’s Trial The State ultimately charged White and Schullerman with Tyrael’s murder, among other crimes. At trial, the State contended that White and Schullerman poisoned Tyrael with Tylenol 3, alleging that White feigned a UTI and obtained a Tylenol 3 prescription under false pretense. To support that contention, Dr. Rashid testified that a person’s...
Opinión de la Corte Suprema · Supreme Court of Georgia · 1 de octubre de 2024
Depriest v. State
Resumen de Georgia Commons (escrito con IA): La Corte Suprema de Georgia confirmó la condena por asesinato en la comisión de un delito grave de un hombre del condado de Newton por matar a tiros a su primo, y determinó que las pruebas respaldaban la intención y que cualquier error en las instrucciones al jurado fue inofensivo.
319 Ga. 874 FINAL COPY S24A1152. DEPRIEST v. THE STATE.
Opinión de la Corte Suprema · Supreme Court of Georgia · 14 de mayo de 2024
In the Matter of James W. Davis, III
Resumen de Georgia Commons (escrito con IA): La Corte Suprema de Georgia inhabilitó al abogado James W. Davis III por usar a sabiendas su cuenta fiduciaria para ayudar a interceptar y robar un pago de seguro de $3 millones destinado a un asegurado.
3 See In the Matter of Head, 317 Ga. 512, 512 (893 SE2d 706) (2023) (noting that, because the respondent attorney failed to file a Notice of Rejection, the underlying facts were “deemed admitted by [his] default”). 4 The record includes the State Bar’s Notice of Discipline, a memorandum of grievance issued by the State Bar to Davis, and orders filed in a...
Having reviewed the record and considered the facts deemed admitted by Davis’s default, the State Disciplinary Board found probable cause to believe that Davis violated Rules 1.15 (I), 1.15 (II) (a),6 and 8.4 (a) (4). The maximum sanction for a violation of Rules 6 Based on the underlying facts, it does not appear that Davis violated Rule 1.15 (II) (a),...
Opinión de la Corte Suprema · Supreme Court of Georgia · 29 de mayo de 2024
Jones v. State
Resumen de Georgia Commons (escrito con IA): La Corte Suprema de Georgia confirmó la condena por asesinato en el curso de un delito grave de un hombre del condado de DeKalb por la muerte a golpes de una mujer a quien había acordado pagar por sexo, y rechazó los cuestionamientos a la evidencia, su decisión de no testificar y su cadena perpetua.
A few hours later, Bernard Nguyen, a maintenance man, arrived at the vacant home to prepare it for a new tenant. As he began cleaning on May 12, he noticed blood in an upstairs bathroom. He then noticed blood near the stairs that he overlooked when he first went up the stairs. Not finding anyone upstairs, he checked a downstairs bedroom, where he saw a...
319 Ga. 140 FINAL COPY S24A0351. JONES v. THE STATE.
Opinión de la Corte Suprema · Supreme Court of Georgia · 31 de octubre de 2024
GEORGIA ASSOCIATION OF CLUB EXECUTIVES, INC. v. STATE OF GEORGIA (Two Cases)
Resumen de Georgia Commons (escrito con IA): La Corte Suprema de Georgia confirmó el impuesto del uno por ciento de Georgia a los clubes de entretenimiento para adultos que combinan baile desnudo con venta de alcohol, y dictaminó que el impuesto no viola la libertad de expresión porque se enfoca en los daños que causan esos negocios, no en el baile mismo.
Even the two state supreme courts that have upheld under intermediate scrutiny taxes or fees similar to the Assessment (and which the majority opinion cites as persuasive authority) do not characterize the state’s interest in the way the majority opinion does here. See Bushco v. Utah State Tax Comm., 225 P3d 153, 167 (Utah 2009) (“[T]he record supports the...
2 OCGA § 15-21-209 was passed in 2015. In November 2016, Georgia voters voted to amend the Georgia Constitution to allow for the Assessment. See Ga. Const. of 1983, Art. III, Sec. IX, Par. VI (o) (“The General Assembly . . . may impose assessments on adult entertainment establishments as defined by law; and . . . may provide by general law for the...
Opinión de la Corte Suprema · Supreme Court of Georgia · 30 de abril de 2024
Ward v. State
Resumen de Georgia Commons (escrito con IA): La Corte Suprema de Georgia confirmó las condenas por asesinato en la comisión de un delito grave y cargos relacionados de un hombre del condado de Paulding, rechazando sus argumentos de que el jurado debió considerar la opción de homicidio voluntario, de que su condena por el segundo tiroteo era legalmente inconsistente, y de que su abogado fue ineficaz.
318 Ga. 884 FINAL COPY S24A0352. WARD v. THE STATE.
16 At the motion-for-new-trial hearing, the prosecutor advised the trial court that the State and Ward — through his motion-for-new-trial counsel — had “agreed to stipulate” that Belin was “in custody” for the October 2020 charge from October 12, 2020, until February 28, 2021, shortly before the crimes at issue occurred. before trial that evidence of...
Opinión de la Corte Suprema · Supreme Court of Georgia · 10 de diciembre de 2024
Sumrall v. State
Resumen de Georgia Commons (escrito con IA): La Corte Suprema de Georgia confirmó el rechazo de la solicitud, presentada décadas tarde, de un hombre del condado de DeKalb para obtener trato retroactivo de infractor primerizo, al determinar que nunca obtuvo el consentimiento requerido del fiscal antes de presentarla y que la ley no viola sus derechos constitucionales.
1. Georgia’s “First Offender Act[, OCGA § 42-8-60 et seq.,] is a unique act by which the legislature extends a form of grace to individuals who commit certain types of crimes.” Howard v. State, 319 Ga. 114, 117 (2) (902 SE2d 551) (2024). Under the Act, “a first- time felony offender who enters a guilty plea may be sentenced to probation or confinement...
Ammon R. Sumrall, pro se. Sherry Boston, District Attorney, Deborah D. Wellborn, Lenny I. Krick, Assistant District Attorneys; Christopher M. Carr, Attorney General, Beth A. Burton, Deputy Attorney General, Meghan H. Hill, Clint C. Malcolm, Senior Assistant Attorneys General, for appellee.
Afinar los resultados
Los números cuentan los documentos que encontró esta búsqueda.