In the Matter of Melvin T. Johnson

Melvin T. Johnson, a Georgia lawyer, faced five separate State Bar disciplinary complaints covering misconduct in a domestic relations case, an estate matter, a personal injury case, an Alabama medical malpractice case, and a divorce case. Johnson missed court hearings while under suspension without telling anyone, mishandled hundreds of thousands of dollars entrusted to him by a client, forged an out-of-state lawyer's and clients' signatures on court documents, and lied to clients about the status of their cases. When the State Bar tried to gather evidence through discovery requests, Johnson ignored them entirely, even after the Bar warned him and offered him a chance to respond. A special master struck his answers as a sanction and deemed all the allegations admitted. The Supreme Court of Georgia reviewed the special master's recommendation and agreed that, given the seriousness and pattern of the misconduct and Johnson's refusal to participate in the process, disbarment was the appropriate punishment.

The Supreme Court of Georgia held that Johnson's pattern of serious misconduct, including mishandling client funds, forging signatures, neglecting clients, and practicing while suspended, combined with his refusal to cooperate in the disciplinary process, warranted disbarment as the appropriate sanction.

The ruling removes Johnson from the practice of law in Georgia, protecting future clients from similar harm. It also signals to other Georgia attorneys that ignoring State Bar discovery requests and disciplinary proceedings can itself justify the harshest sanction available.

Disbarred

1. Because Johnson never responded to the State Bar's discovery requests despite warnings, the special master struck his answers as a discovery sanction, which under Bar Rule 4-212 (a) meant the facts and rule violations alleged in all five complaints were deemed admitted.
2. The court found no abuse of discretion in that sanction, explaining that a hearing is not required before imposing harsh discovery sanctions when the record shows the party's failure to respond was intentional or willful, as Johnson's more than two-month, unexplained silence showed here.
3. Reviewing each of the five matters, the court agreed with the special master that Johnson violated specific Georgia Rules of Professional Conduct in each, including rules on diligence, candor to tribunals, safekeeping client property (trust account, or IOLTA, rules), improper client solicitation, unauthorized practice of law, and misrepresentation.
4. Applying the American Bar Association's Standards for Imposing Lawyer Sanctions, a framework courts use to weigh aggravating and mitigating factors in attorney discipline, the court identified numerous aggravating factors such as prior discipline, dishonest motive, a pattern of multiple offenses, refusal to acknowledge wrongdoing, and vulnerable clients, with no mitigating factors present.
5. Given the combination of serious misconduct, including forged documents and mishandled trust funds, with repeated neglect of clients and refusal to cooperate with the disciplinary process, the court concluded disbarment, rather than a lesser sanction, was warranted.

• attorney disbarment
• State Bar of Georgia
• forged signatures
• trust account violations
• discovery sanctions