In the Matter of Nubiyn Matamalaki Mosi Mzekewe

A man hired attorney Nubiyn Mzekewe to help him get accounting and control over his disabled veteran brother's VA benefits, which were being managed by a court-appointed VA guardian. Mzekewe later expanded the representation into a federal lawsuit against the VA, the governor, and the guardian, which courts dismissed as legally baseless. After the brother died and the client became executor of the estate, Mzekewe took $80,000, or 40 percent, from a $200,000 distribution the VA guardian sent, claiming his contingency fee agreement covered it, even though that agreement never covered the probate work and no money had actually been recovered through the litigation. The State Bar charged Mzekewe with multiple rule violations, and a Special Master who held a hearing Mzekewe skipped recommended disbarment. The Supreme Court of Georgia reviewed the record, agreed with the Special Master's findings, and ordered Mzekewe disbarred, also requiring him to repay the client before he could ever seek readmission to the Bar.

The court held that an attorney who expands representation without client consent, charges an unreasonable and unearned contingency fee, fails to keep disputed funds separate, and converts those funds to personal use violates multiple Rules of Professional Conduct, warranting disbarment, especially given aggravating factors like prior discipline and lack of remorse.

The ruling protects clients, especially vulnerable ones like disabled veterans' families, from lawyers who overcharge and misuse disputed funds. It reinforces that Georgia attorneys must clearly explain fee agreements and keep contested money separate, or risk losing their license to practice.

Disbarred

1. 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 aggravating or mitigating factors, to decide the appropriate punishment.
2. The attorney expanded his representation into probate work involving estate funds without a new agreement covering that work and without telling the client he intended to apply his 40 percent contingency fee to those funds, violating his duty to abide by the client's decisions about the scope of representation.
3. Because neither fee agreement covered administering the estate's assets and no money was actually recovered through the federal lawsuit (the contingency fee's trigger), the attorney had no legal basis to take $80,000, or 40 percent, of funds that already belonged to the estate, making the fee unreasonable.
4. The attorney failed to keep the disputed $80,000 separate from his own money and instead withdrew it for personal use, violating his duty under Georgia's trust-account rules to safeguard client and third-party funds and never withdraw disputed money for himself.
5. He also pursued a federal lawsuit that a probate court staff attorney had already told him was legally baseless, showing he knowingly advanced an unwarranted claim in violation of his duty not to abuse the legal process.
6. The court found eight aggravating factors, including a dishonest motive, a pattern of misconduct, prior discipline, and refusal to acknowledge wrongdoing, and only one possible mitigating factor that the attorney had forfeited by failing to appear at his own hearing, tipping the balance strongly toward disbarment.

• attorney disbarment
• State Bar discipline
• contingency fee dispute
• misappropriation of client funds
• veterans benefits guardianship