In the Matter of John Andrew Leslie

• Court: Supreme Court of Georgia
• Decided: March 20, 2017
• Docket: S17Y0374
• Status: 200

Opinion

300 Ga. 774 FINAL COPY

S17Y0374. IN THE MATTER OF JOHN ANDREW LESLIE.

PER CURIAM.

This disciplinary matter is before the Court on the petition for voluntary

discipline, before the filing of a formal complaint, filed by Respondent John

Andrew Leslie (State Bar No. 447067), see Bar Rule 4-227 (b) (2). In his

petition, Leslie, who became a member of the Bar in 2004, seeks the imposition

of a Review Panel reprimand for his admitted violations of Rules 1.3, 1.4, and

3.2 of the Georgia Rules of Professional Conduct, see Bar Rule 4-102 (d).

While the maximum sanction for a violation of Rule 1.3 is disbarment and the

maximum sanction for a violation of the other rules is a public reprimand, we

agree to accept Leslie’s request that this matter be resolved by a Review Panel

reprimand, as the State Bar recommends.

In his petition, Leslie admits with regard to State Disciplinary Board

(“SDB”) Docket No. 6900 that a client retained him to represent her in a

personal injury action arising out of a minor motor vehicle accident; he filed a lawsuit on behalf of the client, and the defendant offered his client a settlement

that she did not accept. Leslie further admits that, apart from some pre-suit

discussions with the adjuster and initial settlement discussions with opposing

counsel, he failed to advance the case for several years despite inquiries to that

end by his client, opposing counsel, and the adjuster. He admits that he did not

adequately respond to and communicate with his client about the case during

that time and that he did not interview any witnesses or take depositions during

the course of his representation. As a result, his client’s case was dismissed

pursuant to OCGA § 9-2-60 (b) (dismissal of an action where no order is entered

for five years), and she lost the ability to pursue her personal injury claim.

With regard to SDB Docket No. 6901, Leslie admits that a client retained

him to represent her in connection with a dental malpractice claim. Leslie says

that he filed suit on her behalf, retained an expert dentist, and served written

discovery on the defendant. After the parties exchanged discovery and Leslie’s

client was deposed, Leslie admits, he sent a demand to defense counsel, but

settlement negotiations were not successful, and he failed to prosecute and

advance the case for several years despite inquiries from his client. Leslie also

admits that he did not adequately respond to and communicate with his client

2 about the case during that time and that he did not interview any witnesses or

take depositions during the course of his representation. As a result of his

actions, Leslie admits, his client’s lawsuit was dismissed with prejudice

pursuant to OCGA § 9-2-60 (b), and she lost the ability to pursue her medical

malpractice claim.

Leslie admits that by his conduct in both instances he violated Rules 1.3,

1.4, and 3.2 of the Georgia Rules of Professional Conduct, see Bar Rule 4-102

(d). As discipline for his admitted violations in these two cases, Leslie requests

a Review Panel reprimand. He asserts in mitigation that he does not have a prior

disciplinary record, he did not willfully intend to cause harm to his clients, and

his personal injury practice at the time was understaffed and lacking

administrative support. In addition, Leslie states that he was suffering from

depression (for which he now takes anti-depressants and receives treatment)

following heart surgery and this affected his desire and ability to address

difficult issues in some of his cases. Leslie states that he since has made changes

to his law practice to ensure that these issues do not arise again, including: (1)

implementing a new phone system, which sends an e-mail and message to his

cell phone for every voicemail left for him; (2) hiring an assistant four days a

3 week to help in tracking client communications and other matters; and (3)

utilizing case-management software designed specifically for personal injury

work. Leslie further states that when the clients involved in SDB Docket Nos.

6900 and 6901 made legal claims against him, he worked diligently with his

insurance company to resolve the claims promptly and amicably and to make

sure his clients were compensated for their losses. Finally, Leslie states that he

sincerely regrets the mistakes he made, he had no intention to abandon his

clients, and he has agreed to participate in the Law Practice Management and

Lawyer Assistance Programs offered by the State Bar of Georgia.

The State Bar recommends that the Court accept Leslie’s petition. The

Bar notes that previous disciplinary cases addressing similar violations of Rules

1.3, 1.4, and 3.2 have resulted in a Review Panel reprimand. See, e.g., In the

Matter of Jones, 299 Ga. 736 (791 SE2d 774) (2016) (Review Panel reprimand

for violations of Rules 1.3, 1.4, and 9.3 by failing to file a complaint and

accurately keep the client informed of the status of his case in one matter and

failing to file a timely, sworn answer to the Bar’s notice of investigation of

another matter); In the Matter of Pagano, 298 Ga. 381 (782 SE2d 42) (2016)

(Review Panel reprimand for violations of Rules 1.3 and 1.4 by abandoning

4 client’s case and causing court to dismiss it for want of prosecution; lawyer had

two prior instances of discipline); In the Matter of Graham, 292 Ga. 901 (742

SE2d 735) (2013) (Review Panel reprimand for violations of Rules 1.4 and 3.2

by failing to file lawsuit for client prior to expiration of the limitations period

and failing to respond promptly to inquiries or subpoena from client’s

bankruptcy trustee); In the Matter of Brown-Williams, 290 Ga. 530 (722 SE2d

740) (2012) (Review Panel reprimand for violations of Rules 1.3 and 1.4 for

failing to timely file client’s workers’ compensation claim, causing the statute

of limitations to expire on the claim).

Having reviewed the record, we agree that a Review Panel reprimand is

an appropriate sanction in this matter. Accordingly, the Court hereby orders that

Leslie receive a Review Panel reprimand in accordance with Bar Rules 4-102

(b) (4) and 4-220 for his admitted violations of Rules 1.3, 1.4, and 3.2.

Petition for voluntary discipline accepted. Review Panel reprimand. All

the Justices concur.

Decided March 20, 2017.

Review Panel reprimand.

Hawkins Parnell Thackston & Young, Thomas R. Mock, Jr., for Leslie.

5 Paula J. Frederick, General Counsel State Bar, Andreea N. Morrison,

Assistant General Counsel State Bar, for State Bar of Georgia.