in the Matter of Kurt A. Raulin
This text of in the Matter of Kurt A. Raulin (in the Matter of Kurt A. Raulin) 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
In the Supreme Court of Georgia
Decided: June 20, 2016
S16Y0988, S16Y0989. IN THE MATTER OF KURT A. RAULIN.
PER CURIAM.
These disciplinary matters are before the Court on the Notices of
Discipline seeking the disbarment of Kurt A. Raulin (State Bar No. 595545).
The State Bar attempted to serve Raulin personally at the address listed with the
State Bar, which was a post office box, but Raulin did not acknowledge service
of the disciplinary pleadings within 20 days of mailing. The State Bar then
properly served Raulin by publication, pursuant to Bar Rule 4-203.1 (b) (3) (ii).
Raulin failed to file a Notice of Rejection as to either disciplinary matter.
Therefore, he is in default, has waived his rights 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).
The facts, as deemed admitted by virtue of Raulin’s default, show that, as
to S16Y0988, Raulin was hired by a client to represent that client and three of
the client’s companies in the defense of a civil suit, but failed to abide by the client’s decisions regarding the scope and objectives of the representation, did
not act diligently in his representation, and failed to communicate adequately
with the client. Specifically, the facts show that Raulin filed a late answer to the
civil complaint; that opposing counsel moved to strike the untimely answers and
for default judgment and partial summary judgment; that Raulin filed 11
motions for extension of time to respond, which motions the court ultimately
denied; that Raulin failed to respond to discovery or to attend depositions; and
that the trial court granted the motions to strike and for default judgment as to
three of the defendants in the civil case, granted the motion for partial summary
judgment as to all four defendants, and awarded attorney fees and punitive
damages. In S16Y0989, the facts show that a client hired Raulin in December
2014 to represent him in a garnishment action, and paid Raulin $500 for that
representation. Raulin failed to abide by this client’s decisions concerning the
scope and objectives of the representation, failed to act with reasonable
diligence in representing the client, and failed to promptly respond to the client,
who was unable to reach Raulin between his hiring and March 2015, at which
point Raulin informed the client he would refund the $500 payment, but failed
to do so. Raulin’s representation of this client also occurred while Raulin was
2 suspended for a prior disciplinary violation, see In the Matter of Kurt A. Raulin,
S15Y0157, S15Y0158 (October 6, 2014). As to both disciplinary matters, the
facts show that Raulin failed to respond to, or otherwise participate in, the
disciplinary process.
Based on these facts, the Investigative Panel found probable cause to
believe that, in S16Y0988, Raulin violated Rules 1.2, 1.3, 1.4, 3.2, and 9.3, all
of the Georgia Rules of Professional Conduct found in Bar Rule 4-102 (d). As
to S16Y0989, the Investigative Panel found probable cause to believe that
Raulin violated Rules 1.2, 1.3, 1.4, and 9.3, along with Rules 1.16 (d), 5.5, and
8.4 (a) (4). The maximum sanction for a violation of Rules 1.2, 1.3, 5.5, and 8.4
(a) (4) is disbarment, and the maximum sanction for a violation of Rules 1.4,
1.16 (d), 3.2, and 9.3 is a public reprimand. In aggravation of discipline as to
each of the matters, the Investigative Panel found that these two matters, taken
together, show a pattern of misconduct and noted that Raulin had a prior
disciplinary history, in which he had received an Investigative Panel reprimand
in 2012; had been suspended by this Court from February 4, 2011 to February
25, 2011, see In the Matter of Kurt A. Raulin, S11Y0695; and had received a
suspension from this Court in 2014 that remains in place, see In the Matter of
3 Kurt A. Raulin, S15Y0157, S15Y0158.
Having reviewed the record, we conclude that disbarment is the
appropriate sanction in these matters. Accordingly, it is hereby ordered that the
name of Kurt A. Raulin be removed from the rolls of persons authorized to
practice law in the State of Georgia. Raulin is reminded of his duties pursuant
to Bar Rule 4-219 (c).1
Disbarred. All the Justices concur.
1 Raulin has three other disciplinary matters now pending in this Court (Case nos. S15Y1497, S15Y1498, and S16Y0017). Given his disbarment, these other matters will be transferred to inactive status, subject to being reopened should Raulin at any time petition for reinstatement. 4
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
in the Matter of Kurt A. Raulin, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/in-the-matter-of-kurt-a-raulin-ga-2016.