In the Matter of Curtis Lee Allen

Curtis Lee Allen, a lawyer licensed in both Georgia and Florida, got into disciplinary trouble in Florida for making unprofessional and argumentative remarks to insurance claimants and opposing counsel while representing an insurance company in two matters. He agreed to a consent judgment with the Florida Bar that included a ten-day suspension, a year of probation, ethics training, and costs. After Florida disciplined him, Georgia's State Bar started its own reciprocal proceeding, and Allen asked the Supreme Court of Georgia to impose the same ten-day suspension retroactively, arguing it was a fair match to what Florida did. The State Bar agreed he should get that discipline. But the court found Allen's petition incomplete: he never attached the Florida order and consent judgment, and he did not show he actually stopped practicing law in Georgia during his Florida suspension. Because of these gaps, the court rejected his petition rather than grant it.

The court held that while a ten-day suspension would be substantially similar discipline to what Florida imposed, it could not accept Allen's petition because he failed to attach the Florida disciplinary documents and failed to show he stopped practicing law in Georgia during his Florida suspension, a prerequisite for a retroactive (nunc pro tunc) suspension.

The ruling reminds Georgia lawyers seeking reciprocal discipline from other states that they must submit complete supporting documents and prove they stopped practicing during any suspension before Georgia will match another state's punishment, even when the State Bar itself does not object.

Petition for voluntary discipline rejected

1. The court explained that under Georgia's reciprocal discipline rule (GRPC 9.4 (b)), it generally must impose discipline 'substantially similar' to what another state imposed, and here the requested ten-day suspension matched the Florida suspension exactly, making it presumptively appropriate.
2. The court noted that although Allen is on probation in Florida, Georgia's rules do not include probation as a sanction, but past cases show this does not block accepting a reciprocal suspension without adding the probationary period.
3. The court found that Allen's petition referenced Florida documents, including the Florida Supreme Court's order and the consent judgment, as being attached, but those documents were not actually included in the record, which past decisions have treated as a disqualifying deficiency.
4. The court applied its rule that an attorney seeking a suspension imposed nunc pro tunc, meaning retroactively effective to an earlier date, must show he voluntarily stopped practicing law, when he stopped, and that he met ethical obligations like helping clients find new counsel and transferring files.
5. Because Allen provided no evidence that he actually stopped practicing law in Georgia during his Florida suspension, the court concluded he had not met this burden and therefore could not receive a retroactive suspension.
6. Following its consistent practice of rejecting incomplete voluntary petitions rather than approving them despite gaps, the court rejected Allen's petition even though the State Bar had recommended accepting it.

• attorney discipline
• reciprocal discipline
• State Bar of Georgia
• Florida Bar
• law license suspension