In the Matter of Barry Wayne Rorex

Barry Wayne Rorex, a member of the Georgia Bar since 1997, was disciplined in Arizona after he abandoned the legal matters of three separate clients, failed to communicate with them, kept their files and unearned fees, and ignored the Arizona State Bar's inquiries. Because he did not respond to the Arizona proceedings, he was found in default and the Supreme Court of Arizona suspended him for six months and one day, with reinstatement conditioned on paying restitution and costs. The State Bar of Georgia then sought matching discipline here, known as reciprocal discipline, and served Rorex by publication after he could not be reached directly. Rorex never responded. The State Disciplinary Review Board found Georgia's rules required similar discipline unless certain exceptions applied, and none did. The Supreme Court of Georgia agreed and suspended Rorex for six months, conditioning his reinstatement on proof that he has been reinstated in Arizona and has paid the required restitution and costs.

Under Georgia's reciprocal discipline rule, an attorney disciplined by another state's bar must receive substantially similar discipline in Georgia unless specific exceptions apply, and because none applied here, Rorex was suspended for six months with reinstatement conditioned on his Arizona restitution and cost payments.

The decision shows Georgia lawyers disciplined in other states will typically face matching suspensions here, protecting Georgia clients from attorneys who have already been found to have abandoned clients or mishandled their cases elsewhere.

Six-month suspension imposed, with conditions on reinstatement

1. The court applied Georgia's reciprocal discipline rule (State Bar Rule 9.4 (b) (3)), which requires the State Disciplinary Review Board to recommend discipline substantially similar to that imposed by another state's bar unless specific exceptions are shown from the record.
2. The Review Board checked whether Rorex had received sufficient notice and a chance to respond in both the Arizona and Georgia proceedings, since due process protections must be satisfied before reciprocal discipline can be imposed.
3. The Review Board confirmed that the underlying conduct, abandoning three clients' legal matters, failing to communicate, and keeping client files and unearned fees, would also violate Georgia's disciplinary rules and would draw similar discipline here.
4. Because none of the exceptions listed in Bar Rule 9.4 (b) (3) that would allow a different recommendation were present, the Review Board concluded it had no discretion to recommend anything other than matching discipline, and the court agreed.

• attorney suspension
• reciprocal discipline
• State Bar of Georgia
• Arizona bar discipline
• client abandonment