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:2024 Quitar filtros
Se encontraron 237 pasajes en 117 documentos.
Opinión de la Corte Suprema · Supreme Court of Georgia · 19 de noviembre de 2024
In THE MATTER OF ESTON WILLIAM HOOD, JR. (Two Cases)
Resumen de Georgia Commons (escrito con IA): La Corte Suprema de Georgia suspendió al abogado Eston William Hood, Jr. por dos años, rechazando una suspensión recomendada de un año por considerarla demasiado indulgente dado que admitió haber hecho declaraciones falsas al abogado contrario, al personal del tribunal y al propio Colegio de Abogados del Estado.
1 Hood later amended his petition for voluntary discipline solely to include one inadvertently omitted character reference. With regard to SDBD No. 7407,2 the following facts are established by the record. In late 2018 or early 2019, Hood agreed to represent a client against whom a default judgment, totaling $5,710, had been entered in DeKalb County...
In considering aggravating and mitigating circumstances, the Special Master determined that the following factors applied in aggravation: prior disciplinary history, in that, in 2019, Hood received a Formal Letter of Admonition, a form of confidential discipline, for violations of Rules 1.3 and 1.4 that involved allegations similar to those raised herein;13...
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.
Finally, in September 2019, in response to the grievance filed against her, Stephens made additional false and misleading statements, stating: Throughout this legal ordeal I have informed my client that if a Motion for Contempt was filed and properly served then the money had to be released as I would not jeopardize my license so that he could attempt to...
(b) Conclusions of Law With regard to SDBD No. 7488, the Special Master found that Stephens admitted to violating Rule 1.15 (I) (a) and Rule 1.15 (II) (a), by allowing her trust account to fall below the minimum required balance and causing an overdraft on her trust account. Next, with regard to SDBD No. 7489, the Special Master determined that Stephens...
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 · 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.
2 McDonald admitted that she identified her firm as a “law group,” even though she was a solo practitioner. She testified that, at one point, another attorney had practiced with her, but that attorney left the firm in 2018. She continued practicing as a “law group” through the events leading to this disciplinary matter, which occurred in 2019. provide goods...
Then, on January 9, 2019, after the third party again demanded return of its $4,000,000, McDonald informed the third party that she had received confirmation from her client that the Bitcoin would be delivered “before the end of business today”; represented that, “[a]s a gesture of good faith and recognition for the delay,” she had negotiated with her...
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 · 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...
PER CURIAM. This disciplinary matter is before the Court on the report and recommendation of Special Master Adam M. Hames, who recommends accepting the amended petition for voluntary discipline by Respondent Christian Aaron Coomer (State Bar No. 184995) and imposing a two-year suspension nunc pro tunc to August 16, 2023. In the petition, Coomer admitted...
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 · 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.
difference of interpretation between him and the client. The Special Master observed that OCGA § 13-2-2 provides rules of contract interpretation, including that “[t]he custom of any business or trade shall be binding only when it is of such universal practice as to justify the conclusion that it became, by implication, a part of the contract,” and that...
(b) SDBD No. 7134 In 2016, Crowther settled two personal injury matters on behalf of two sets of clients. A financing company had provided “settlement financing” in both matters in exchange for which the clients granted it a lien on any settlement. After Crowther settled the matters, money was deposited into his trust account. He paid other lienholders, but...
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...
Edgewood filed a petition for certiorari review in the superior court, which affirmed the municipal court's order. [The Court of Appeals] granted Edgewood's application for discretionary appeal[.] 400 Edgewood, LLC, 369 Ga. App. at 673-74 (footnotes omitted). The Court of Appeals reversed, concluding that the municipal court impermissibly entered injunctive...
Opinión de la Corte Suprema · Supreme Court of Georgia · 6 de febrero de 2024
KENNESTONE HOSPITAL, INC. v. EMORY UNIVERSITY
Resumen de Georgia Commons (escrito con IA): La Corte Suprema de Georgia dictaminó que un certificado de necesidad para operar un hospital de cuidados agudos generales es un derecho privado, no público, porque permite a un propietario individual usar su propiedad de una manera específica.
208 (2) (24 LE 625) (1877) (“Railroads, turnpikes, bridges, ferries, are all things of public concern, and the right to erect them is a pub- lic right.”). The right to enforce compliance with penal law, too, is traditionally understood as vindicating “violations of public rights and duties,” Sons of Confederate Veterans, 315 Ga. at 48 (2) (a) (cit- ing 3...
5 Our precedent before Coleman “[did] not expressly employ this distinc- tion [between public and private rights] with respect to retroactive legislation.” Coleman, 294 Ga. at 180 (2) (a). But we recognized in Coleman that the “settled distinction in American law between public and private rights” is “consistent with Georgia law,” and that “a few of our...
Opinión de la Corte Suprema · Supreme Court of Georgia · 11 de junio de 2024
OMSTEAD v. BPG INSPECTION, LLC
Resumen de Georgia Commons (escrito con IA): La Corte Suprema de Georgia dictaminó que la cláusula del contrato de una empresa de inspección de viviendas que prohíbe demandas más de un año después de una inspección es aplicable, incluso contra un reclamo por muerte injusta que surgió después de que ese año expiró.
Omstead argues that the one-year limitation is void because it violates OCGA § 13-8-2 (b), which states, in pertinent part: A covenant, promise, agreement, or understanding [1] in or in connection with or collateral to a contract or agreement relative to the construction, alteration, repair, or maintenance of a building structure, appurtenances, and...
Omstead contends that the one-year limitation is void because it requires Omstead to “indemnify” or “hold [BPG] harmless.”11 We have defined “indemnity” as “the obligation or duty resting on one person to make good any loss or damage another has incurred by acting at his request or for his benefit.” Lanier at McEver, L.P. v. Planners & Engineers...
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 · 19 de marzo de 2024
In the Matter of Joel David Myers
Resumen de Georgia Commons (escrito con IA): La Corte Suprema de Georgia concedió la solicitud del abogado inhabilitado Joel David Myers de certificación de idoneidad para ejercer la abogacía, permitiéndole buscar su readmisión al Colegio de Abogados del Estado de Georgia.
As part of its investigation, the Fitness Board provided notice to the State Bar of Georgia and to the bar membership and chief judge of the Atlanta Judicial Circuit where Myers practiced, provided newspaper notice to the public in the area where Myers had practiced, and sought confirmation from the Client Security Fund that no restitution was due. See Part...
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.
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),...
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...
Opinión de la Corte Suprema · Supreme Court of Georgia · 15 de octubre de 2024
Nabors v. State
Resumen de Georgia Commons (escrito con IA): La Corte Suprema de Georgia confirmó la condena por asesinato de un hombre del condado de Fulton, rechazando sus alegatos de que su abogado le aconsejó erróneamente no testificar y de que el caso se basaba únicamente en el testimonio de un cómplice.
LAGRUA, Justice. In March 2020, Appellant Brejon Nabors was convicted of malice murder and related charges in connection with the shooting death of Mondavius Milan.1 On appeal, Nabors contends (1) trial counsel was ineffective for advising Nabors not to testify in his own defense, and (2) the State failed to prove guilt beyond a reasonable doubt because the...
320 Ga. 43 FINAL COPY S24A0610. NABORS v. THE STATE.
Opinión de la Corte Suprema · Supreme Court of Georgia · 2 de julio de 2024
In the Matter of Christopher Michael
Resumen de Georgia Commons (escrito con IA): La Corte Suprema de Georgia concedió la solicitud de Christopher Michael Howlette para ser certificado apto para ejercer la abogacía nuevamente, más de 15 años después de que entregara voluntariamente su licencia tras cargos por venta de drogas.
Additionally, in connection with his application, Howlette submitted letters of recommendation from his life coach and two attorneys, one of which is his current supervisor. Each “wholeheartedly” endorses Howlette’s readmission to the Bar. His life coach states that she has witnessed his “remarkable transformation and unwavering commitment to personal...
Opinión de la Corte Suprema · Supreme Court of Georgia · 16 de julio de 2024
In the Matter of Christopher Tyson
Resumen de Georgia Commons (escrito con IA): La Corte Suprema de Georgia rechazó la solicitud de un exabogado de Georgia radicado en Luisiana de aceptar una suspensión de seis meses por el mal manejo de los fondos de acuerdo de un cliente, al considerar el castigo propuesto demasiado leve y no comprobadas las afirmaciones de restitución.
PER CURIAM. This disciplinary matter is before the Court on the petition for voluntary discipline filed by Respondent Christopher Tyson (State Bar No. 142208) before the issuance of a formal complaint. See Bar Rule 4-227 (b) (2). Tyson admits to conduct in violation of Rules 1.15 (I) (a), 1.15 (I) (b), 1.15 (I) (c), and 1.15 (II) (b) of the Georgia Rules of...
While the State Bar acknowledges that the maximum penalty for violations of the trust account rules is disbarment, it notes that when the totality of the circumstances supports less severe discipline, this Court has imposed suspensions or even reprimands. See, e.g., In the Matter of Coggins, 314 Ga. 813 (879 SE2d 502) (2022) (accepting petition for...
Opinión de la Corte Suprema · Supreme Court of Georgia · 13 de agosto de 2024
Milliron v. Antonakakis
Resumen de Georgia Commons (escrito con IA): La Corte Suprema de Georgia dictaminó que la Ley de Registros Abiertos de Georgia cubre los registros que un empleado público mantiene en un rol separado como contratista privado, y que las solicitudes de esos registros pueden dirigirse directamente a la persona que los tiene, incluso si la agencia cuenta con un oficial de registros designado.
The Open Records Act provides that “[a]ll public records shall be open for personal inspection and copying,” OCGA § 50-18-71 (a), and to that end, the Act clearly provides that “[a] request made pursuant to this article may be made to the custodian of a public record orally or in writing.” OCGA § 50-18-71 (b) (1) (B) (emphasis supplied). “When, as here,...
Afinar los resultados
Los números cuentan los documentos que encontró esta búsqueda.