In the Matter of Dennis W. Hartley

Dennis W. Hartley was admitted to practice law in Colorado in 1972 and had been a member of the State Bar of Georgia since 1987, though he held emeritus status. In 2019 the Supreme Court of Colorado disbarred him after he admitted to multiple complaints, including failing to report his own DUI convictions to Colorado disciplinary officials and, in representing several clients, failing to set up fee agreements, failing to keep client money in a trust account, failing to communicate with clients, filing a probate case without a client's knowledge, sharing fees with non-lawyers, and practicing law while suspended. Because Georgia allows reciprocal discipline based on another state's punishment, the State Bar of Georgia tried to notify Hartley, could not locate him for personal service, and served him by publication instead. He never responded. A Review Board compared Colorado's and Georgia's rules and recommended disbarment. The Supreme Court of Georgia agreed and ordered him removed from the rolls of lawyers allowed to practice in Georgia.

When another state disbars a lawyer for misconduct that Georgia's rules would also treat as warranting disbarment, the Supreme Court of Georgia imposes the same reciprocal discipline; here, because Colorado disbarred Hartley for admitted misconduct matching Georgia's disbarment standards, the court disbarred him from practicing law in Georgia.

The ruling protects Georgia clients and the legal system by ensuring a lawyer disbarred elsewhere for serious misconduct, including mishandling client funds and hiding cases from clients, cannot continue practicing in Georgia simply because he holds a Georgia bar license.

Disbarred

1. The court applied Georgia's reciprocal discipline rule (Georgia Rules of Professional Conduct, Rule 9.4 (b)), which lets Georgia impose the same discipline another state already imposed on a lawyer, unless Georgia's own rules would call for something different.
2. The State Bar tried to notify Hartley directly and through the Colorado sheriff, could not locate him, and lawfully served him by publication as the bar rules allow, and Hartley never responded or objected.
3. The Review Board compared Colorado's disciplinary rules and procedures to Georgia's and found that the misconduct Hartley admitted to in Colorado, including failing to report DUI convictions and multiple instances of mishandling client fees and communication, would also warrant disbarment under Georgia's rules.
4. Because no meaningful difference existed between the two states' standards for this misconduct, the Review Board found no basis to recommend anything other than the same discipline Colorado imposed, namely disbarment.
5. Neither the State Bar nor Hartley objected to the Review Board's report, and the Supreme Court of Georgia, after reviewing the record, agreed that disbarment was the appropriate sanction.

• attorney disbarment
• reciprocal discipline
• State Bar of Georgia
• Colorado disbarment
• client trust account violations