In the Matter of Heather E. Jordan

• Court: Supreme Court of Georgia
• Decided: January 22, 2019
• Docket: S19Y0266
• Status: Published

Opinion

In the Supreme Court of Georgia

Decided: January 22, 2019

S19Y0266. IN THE MATTER OF HEATHER E. JORDAN.

PER CURIAM.

Heather E. Jordan (State Bar No. 587470) has been a member of the Bar

since 2011. In a September 4, 2018 report and recommendation, special master

Chong Joo Kim recommended that this Court impose a public reprimand for

Jordan’s misconduct in representing a single client in a custody matter. Neither

the State Bar nor Jordan filed exceptions to the special master’s report, and we

agree that a public reprimand is the appropriate level of discipline in this matter.

The facts alleged and the violations charged in the formal complaint are

deemed admitted as follows. In December 2011, a client hired Jordan to

represent him in a divorce matter. Jordan agreed and finalized the client’s

divorce. Subsequently, Jordan agreed to represent the client in a custody matter.

From January to May 2016, the client attempted to contact Jordan numerous

times via email, text message, and telephone calls to obtain a status update on

his custody case. However, Jordan failed to respond promptly to the client’s requests for information and updates in the case, she failed to perform the

necessary work on the case, she provided incorrect information to opposing

counsel in the client’s discovery responses, and she ultimately stopped

responding to the client and stopped working on the case. The client retained

new counsel, emailed Jordan, and requested his file. Jordan did not respond to

the client and did not return his file. The client’s new counsel also attempted on

several occasions to request the file, and while Jordan did not respond to these

requests, she did eventually send the client his file.

The special master concluded that Jordan violated Rule 1.2 of the Georgia

Rules of Professional Conduct by failing to communicate or consult with the

client on the scope and objectives of the representation. In addition, the special

master concluded that Jordan violated Rule 1.3 by failing to perform work on

the client’s custody case and Rule 1.4 when she failed to keep the client

informed about the status of his case and failed to respond to his numerous

requests for information in the case. Finally, the special master concluded that

Jordan violated Rule 1.16 when she failed to timely surrender his file to him or

his new counsel. The maximum penalty for a violation of Rules 1.2 and 1.3 is

disbarment, while the maximum penalty for a violation of Rules 1.4 and 1.16 is

2 a public reprimand.

The special master recognized that this Court relies on the American Bar

Associations Standards for Imposing Lawyer Sanctions for general guidance in

determining the appropriate level of discipline, see In the Matter of Morse, 265

Ga. 353, 354 (456 SE2d 52) (1995), and that ABA Standard 4.43 provides that

a reprimand is generally appropriate when a lawyer is negligent and does not act

with reasonable diligence in representing a client and causes injury or potential

injury to a client.

The special master found in mitigation the absence of a prior disciplinary

record, see ABA Standard 9.32 (a), as well as Jordan’s inexperience in the

practice of law, see ABA Standard 9.32 (f). The special master recommended

that, based on the violations Jordan is deemed to have admitted, she should

receive a public reprimand.

Having reviewed the record, we agree that the admitted facts are sufficient

to support a finding that Jordan violated Rules 1.2, 1.3, 1.4, and 1.16 of the

Georgia Rules of Professional Conduct. In light of those facts and the mitigating

circumstances, we agree that a public reprimand is the appropriate level of

discipline. See In the Matter of Gantt, 302 Ga. 3 (804 SE2d 336) (2017); In the

3 Matter of Stewart, 301 Ga. 227 (800 SE2d 279) (2017). Accordingly, we order

that Heather E. Jordan receive a public reprimand in accordance with Bar Rules

4-102 (b) (3) and 4-220 (c).

Petition for voluntary discipline accepted. Public Reprimand. All the

Justices concur.