In the Matter of Dana Nicole Jackson

An attorney was hired in 2018 by another lawyer and her client to collect a debt. The attorney won a court judgment and collected over $3,750 from the debtors, but she never sent any of that money to her clients and refused to answer their repeated requests for information about the case. The State Bar filed a formal complaint against her, but she could not be personally served and never responded even after being served by publication. Because she defaulted, the facts against her were treated as admitted. A Special Master held a hearing on aggravating and mitigating factors and recommended disbarment. The Supreme Court of Georgia reviewed the record, agreed that disbarment was appropriate given her admitted misconduct and lack of any explanation, and ordered her name removed from the rolls of attorneys authorized to practice law in Georgia.

The court held that disbarment is the appropriate sanction where an attorney knowingly converted client funds by collecting money owed to clients and failing to deliver it, and also failed to communicate with clients, especially given no remorse, restitution, or explanation.

The ruling removes an attorney from practice in Georgia after she kept client funds she collected on their behalf, reinforcing that lawyers who take client money and refuse to communicate face the harshest professional consequence: losing their license to practice law.

Disbarred

1. The Special Master found, based on the attorney's default (her failure to respond, which counts as admitting the allegations), that she collected over $3,750 for clients but never sent them any money and refused to communicate about the case.
2. The court applied Georgia Rules of Professional Conduct 1.4 (requiring lawyers to keep clients informed and consult with them) and 1.15(I)(c) (requiring lawyers to promptly notify clients of received funds and deliver those funds), finding both rules violated.
3. Using the ABA Standards for Imposing Lawyer Sanctions, a framework that looks at the duty violated, the lawyer's mental state, the harm caused, and aggravating or mitigating factors, the Special Master found the attorney acted knowingly and intentionally, which pointed toward disbarment for converting client property.
4. The Special Master weighed aggravating factors, including a dishonest or selfish motive, refusal to acknowledge wrongdoing, and indifference to making restitution, against a single mitigating factor, no prior discipline, and found the aggravating factors outweighed the one mitigating factor.
5. Consistent with prior Georgia disciplinary cases disbarring attorneys who misappropriate client funds without remorse or restitution, the court concluded disbarment was the appropriate sanction here since the attorney offered no explanation or amends.

• attorney disbarment
• client funds
• debt collection
• State Bar of Georgia
• default judgment