In the Matter of Craig S. Bonnell

Craig Bonnell, a Georgia lawyer, faced a State Bar disciplinary complaint accusing him of mishandling three clients' matters, including failing to serve court papers, communicate with clients, and turn over files. After Bonnell missed his answer deadline following a serious car accident, a special master eventually declared him in default and denied his motion to reopen the case, meaning the factual allegations against him were treated as admitted. The State Disciplinary Review Board later concluded the special master abused his discretion in entering default, since Bonnell had been actively participating in the process, and recommended vacating the default and holding a full hearing. The State Bar objected, but the Supreme Court of Georgia agreed with the Review Board, finding the default judgment improper given Bonnell's participation and the accident that delayed him. The court vacated the default and the special master's recommendation and sent the case back for a decision on the merits.

The court held that the special master abused his discretion by entering a default judgment against Bonnell and by refusing to open that default, because Bonnell had actively participated in the proceedings, had a documented medical excuse for his delay, and the Bar had never formally moved for default, so the case must be decided on its merits.

The ruling reinforces that Georgia's attorney discipline system strongly favors deciding cases on their actual facts rather than by procedural default, especially when a lawyer has been engaged in the process, protecting attorneys facing discipline from losing by technicality while still allowing client complaints to be fully examined.

Vacated and remanded with direction to decide on the merits

1. The court explained that Georgia's attorney discipline system has a strong preference for deciding cases on their actual facts (the merits) rather than letting a case be resolved automatically because a deadline was missed (a default).
2. It noted that a state law governing when defaults can be reopened, O.C.G.A. § 9-11-55(b), applies to bar discipline cases and should be applied generously so that cases are decided on their merits whenever possible, especially when the missed deadline was not due to willful or grossly negligent conduct.
3. Applying that rule to the facts, the court found Bonnell had filed answers, attended conferences, and negotiated deadlines with the special master and the Bar, making this case unlike the usual default case where an attorney completely ignores the disciplinary process.
4. The court also noted the State Bar never formally asked for a default judgment, had at one point conceded the special master could reopen the case, and did not dispute that Bonnell's car accident prevented him from working shortly before his answer was due.
5. Because Bonnell had a documented excuse and had shown a plausible defense to some of the claims, and because reopening the default would not harm the Bar, the court concluded the special master should have reopened the default and let the case proceed on the merits.

• attorney discipline
• default judgment
• State Bar of Georgia
• legal malpractice claims
• special master hearing