In the Matter of Alexander E. Kahn
This text of 306 Ga. 189 (In the Matter of Alexander E. Kahn) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Supreme Court of Georgia primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.
Opinion
306 Ga. 189 FINAL COPY
S19Y0823. IN THE MATTER OF ALEXANDER E. KAHN.
PER CURIAM.
This disciplinary matter is before the Court on a Notice of
Discipline seeking the disbarment of Alexander E. Kahn (State Bar
No. 405797) for his gross misconduct in his representation of a client
and in business and financial dealings with that client.1 The Notice
of Discipline was issued on February 26, 2019, and the State Bar
personally served Kahn, but he failed to file a Notice of Rejection.
Therefore, he is in default, has waived his right to an evidentiary
hearing, and is subject to such discipline and further proceedings as
may be determined by this Court. See Bar Rule 4-208.1 (b). Kahn
is currently under an administrative suspension for failure to pay
his Bar dues.
1 This Court issued an order on January 12, 2018, comprehensively amending Part IV of the Rules and Regulations for the Organization and Government of the State Bar of Georgia (“Bar Rules”); the new rules govern this matter because it was commenced after July 1, 2018. The facts, as deemed admitted by virtue of Kahn’s default,
show that Kahn, who was admitted to the Bar in 2002, began
providing legal and financial advice to a client in 2011. He formed
Troy Holdings, LLC and encouraged the client to invest money in
the company. Between 2012 and 2018, the client delivered over
$300,000 to Kahn for investment in Troy Holdings. Kahn
misrepresented to the client that she owned 75% of Troy Holdings
and that her investment was achieving a 10% rate of return. The
client repeatedly asked Kahn for a copy of Troy Holdings’s operating
agreement, financial statements, and investment records, but he
failed to provide the requested documents; she also asked for a
return of her investment, but Kahn has failed to return any money.
Additionally, in Kahn’s representation of the client in tax
matters, he represented that he was preparing her tax returns but
failed to provide her copies of the returns; he failed to provide
documentation related to his representation of the client in
connection with a penalty assessed with regard to her 2013 taxes;
and he failed to file her 2015 return after he had prepared it and she
2 had signed it. Finally, although Kahn agreed to prepare a will for
the client, he failed to deliver it despite her repeated requests.
These facts show that throughout his representation of the
client, Kahn willfully abandoned the legal matters entrusted to him,
to the client’s detriment; he failed to keep her reasonably informed
about the status of her legal matters; and he collected unreasonable
fees, since he did not do the work he was paid to do. With regard to
the business transactions, he failed to disclose the terms of the
transactions, failed to obtain the client’s written consent to the
essential terms of the transactions, and failed to advise her of the
desirability of seeking the advice of independent counsel.
Additionally, Kahn failed to hold the client’s funds separate from his
own, failed to deliver her funds to her, and failed to render a full
accounting when she requested one. Finally, Kahn failed to submit
a sworn, written response to the Notice of Investigation as required
by Bar Rule 4-204.3.
These facts establish that Kahn violated Rules 1.3, 1.4, 1.5, 1.8
(a), 1.15 (I), 1.16, and 8.4 (a) (4) of the Georgia Rules of Professional
3 Conduct found in Bar Rule 4-102 (d). The maximum sanction for a
violation of Rules 1.3, 1.15 (I), and 8.4 (a) (4) is disbarment, and the
maximum sanction for a violation of Rules 1.4, 1.5, 1.8 (a), and 1.16
is a public reprimand.
In aggravation of discipline, the Board found that Kahn acted
willfully and dishonestly, acted with a selfish motive, has engaged
in multiple violations of the Rules of Professional Conduct, has
intentionally failed to comply with the rules of the disciplinary
process, has experience in the practice of law, and has been
indifferent to making restitution, as the record shows that the client
obtained a judgment against him, but he has failed to appear at post-
judgment discovery depositions.
We agree that disbarment is the appropriate sanction in this
matter. See, e.g., In the Matter of Snipes, 303 Ga. 800 (815 SE2d 54)
(2018) (disbarment for abandonment of client and conversion of
client funds to personal use); In the Matter of Choi, 297 Ga. 793 (778
SE2d 228) (2015) (accepting voluntary surrender of license, which is
tantamount to disbarment, for failing to properly manage
4 substantial funds entrusted to attorney in fiduciary capacity
involving law practice and two business ventures).
Therefore, the Court orders that the name of Alexander E.
Kahn be removed from the rolls of persons authorized to practice
law in the State of Georgia. Kahn is reminded of his duties pursuant
to Bar Rule 4-219 (b).
Disbarred. All the Justices concur.
Decided June 10, 2019.
Disbarment.
Paula J. Frederick, General Counsel State Bar, William D.
NeSmith III, Deputy General Counsel State Bar, Jenny K.
Mittelman, Assistant General Counsel State Bar, for State Bar of
Georgia.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
306 Ga. 189, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/in-the-matter-of-alexander-e-kahn-ga-2019.