In the Matter of Keith Chance Hardy

Keith Chance Hardy, a Georgia lawyer admitted in 2014, faced discipline over three separate client matters. In one, he took a client's $1,500 fee and did nothing, missing an arraignment that led to a bench warrant. In another, he was appointed to defend a woman charged with murder, then transferred over $20,000 out of her bank account and kept her jewelry instead of helping her. In a third, he secretly negotiated and forged a settlement check for a car accident client, kept the money he claimed he would use to pay her medical bills, and cut off contact. Hardy never answered the State Bar's formal complaint, so the facts were treated as admitted. A special master recommended disbarment, and the Supreme Court of Georgia agreed, finding no factors that would soften the punishment and several that made it worse, including his dishonesty, pattern of misconduct, and lack of remorse. The court ordered Hardy removed from the rolls of Georgia lawyers.

The court held that disbarment is the appropriate sanction because Hardy admitted, through his default, to converting client funds, abandoning clients' matters, deceiving clients, and repeatedly ignoring the State Bar's disciplinary process, with no mitigating factors to offset multiple serious aggravating factors.

The ruling removes a lawyer who stole client money and abandoned people who needed legal help, including an incarcerated client and accident victims. It reassures Georgians that the State Bar and the Supreme Court of Georgia will disbar attorneys who convert client funds and ignore disciplinary proceedings.

Disbarred

1. Because Hardy never answered the State Bar's formal complaint, the special master treated all the facts alleged and rule violations charged as admitted under State Bar Rule 4-212 (a), which lets a default stand in for a factual finding.
2. The special master reviewed each of the three client matters and found Hardy violated multiple Georgia Rules of Professional Conduct, including failing to competently represent clients, abandoning their cases, failing to communicate, charging or keeping unearned fees, mishandling client funds and property held in trust, and improperly ending representation without protecting clients' interests.
3. The court applied the ABA Standards for Imposing Lawyer Sanctions, a framework that weighs the duty violated, the lawyer's mental state, the harm caused, and any aggravating or mitigating circumstances, and found this framework pointed to disbarment as the presumptive sanction given the theft, deceit, and serious injury involved.
4. The court then considered aggravating factors, including Hardy's prior discipline, dishonest and selfish motive, pattern of misconduct across multiple clients, multiple offenses, refusal to acknowledge wrongdoing or show remorse, victimizing a vulnerable incarcerated client, indifference to repaying stolen funds, and illegal conduct in taking money from a client's bank account, finding no mitigating factors to balance them.
5. Weighing these admitted violations and aggravating factors together, and noting consistency with prior Georgia disbarment cases involving neglect, theft, and failure to respond to disciplinary authorities, the court concluded disbarment was the only appropriate outcome.

• attorney disbarment
• State Bar of Georgia
• client fund theft
• legal malpractice
• default judgment