In the Matter of Majd M. Ghanayem

Majd M. Ghanayem was a lawyer licensed in both Texas and Georgia. In Texas, a client hired him in 2015 to file a legal action to terminate a father's parental rights over her son. A Texas disciplinary panel found that Ghanayem failed to file the necessary petition until 2017, did not keep the client informed, and lied to her about the case's status, going so far as to give her a fake court order with a forged judge's signature. Texas disbarred him in December 2019. Because Georgia disciplines lawyers reciprocally for misconduct punished in other states, the State Bar of Georgia issued a notice seeking the same punishment here. Ghanayem could not be personally served and did not respond even after being served by publication. The Supreme Court of Georgia reviewed the Texas findings and the recommendation of its own Review Board and agreed that disbarment was the appropriate punishment in Georgia as well.

The court held that disbarment imposed by Texas for neglecting a client's matter, failing to communicate, and forging a judge's signature on a fraudulent order warranted substantially similar reciprocal discipline in Georgia, namely disbarment.

The ruling removes a lawyer who forged a judge's signature and deceived a client from practicing law in Georgia, protecting future clients. It also shows how Georgia enforces discipline imposed by other states, closing gaps that might otherwise let disciplined lawyers keep practicing elsewhere.

Disbarred

1. The court applied Georgia's reciprocal discipline rule (Rule 9.4 of the Georgia Rules of Professional Conduct), which lets Georgia impose discipline based on another state's disciplinary findings against a lawyer licensed in both places.
2. A Texas disciplinary panel had already found, after a hearing where Ghanayem was present, that he neglected a client's parental-rights case, failed to communicate with her, and gave her a fraudulent court order with a forged judge's signature.
3. The State Bar's Review Board compared Texas's disciplinary rules and procedures to Georgia's equivalent rules and concluded that the same misconduct would warrant disbarment under Georgia law, finding no reason to impose a lesser sanction.
4. Because Ghanayem did not object to the Review Board's report despite being properly served, and the court's own review of the record supported the Review Board's conclusion, the court adopted disbarment as the appropriate sanction.

• attorney disbarment
• reciprocal discipline
• forged court order
• State Bar of Georgia
• Texas disciplinary action