in the Matter of Neville Trevor Francis
This text of in the Matter of Neville Trevor Francis (in the Matter of Neville Trevor Francis) 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 1, 2015
S15Y1117. IN THE MATTER OF NEVILLE TREVOR FRANCIS.
PER CURIAM.
This disciplinary matter is before the Court on the petition for voluntary
discipline filed by Neville Trevor Francis (State Bar 272666). Francis, who was
admitted to the Bar in 1989, seeks a Review Panel reprimand for the improper
use of his trust account.
Francis describes himself as a solo practitioner with a “very small, almost
non-existent practice.” He admits that prior to the initiation of this matter, he
did not maintain an operating account for his practice and that on July 5, 2013,
he wrote a check to himself from his trust account for $1,300.00, believing that
those funds were available and owed to him as fees, but the check resulted in an
overdraft of $40.95. He also admits that it had been his practice to allow some
of his clients to make deposits to his trust account for the fees to be earned and
for fees that had already been earned and that this practice resulted in a co-
mingling of personal and fiduciary funds. He admits that his conduct constitutes a violation of Rule 1.15 (II) of the Georgia Rules of Professional Conduct found
in Bar Rule 4-102 (d). However, he has now completed an audit of his practice
with the State Bar’s Law Practice Management program and has implemented
the recommendations made as a result of the audit. He asserts that his conduct
was not for a selfish or dishonest motive and that he has cooperated with the
State Bar during the disciplinary process.
The State Bar responds that it does not object to the request for the
imposition of a Review Panel reprimand, noting Francis’s cooperation and the
fact that no clients were harmed. Although Francis has had three prior instances
of confidential discipline, Investigative Panel reprimands in 2010 and 2011 and
a formal letter of admonition in 2011, see State Bar Rule 4-208, having
reviewed the matter carefully, we conclude that a Review Panel reprimand is the
appropriate sanction in this case, and we therefore accept the petition for
voluntary discipline. Accordingly, the Court hereby orders that Neville Trevor
Francis receive a Review Panel reprimand in accordance with Bar Rules 4-102
(b) (4) and 4-220 (b) for his admitted violation of Rule 1.15 (II).
Petition for voluntary discipline accepted. Review Panel reprimand. All
the Justices concur.
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 Neville Trevor Francis, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/in-the-matter-of-neville-trevor-francis-ga-2015.