In the Matter of Richard R. Buckley, Jr

CourtSupreme Court of Georgia
DecidedApril 17, 2017
DocketS17Y0418
Status200

This text of In the Matter of Richard R. Buckley, Jr (In the Matter of Richard R. Buckley, Jr) 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.

Bluebook
In the Matter of Richard R. Buckley, Jr, (Ga. 2017).

Opinion

301 Ga. 47 FINAL COPY

S17Y0418. IN THE MATTER OF RICHARD R. BUCKLEY, JR. PER CURIAM.

This disciplinary matter is before the Court on a notice of discipline by

which the State Bar seeks the disbarment of Respondent Richard R. Buckley,

Jr. (State Bar No. 092905) for violations of Georgia Rules of Professional

Conduct 1.2, 1.3, 1.4, 1.16 (d), 5.5 (a), and 9.3.1 See Bar Rule 4-102 (d).

The State Bar served notice upon Respondent, but he failed to file a notice of

rejection. Accordingly, he is in default, he has waived his right to an

evidentiary hearing, and he is subject to such discipline and further

proceedings as the Court deems appropriate. See Bar Rule 4-208.1 (b). For

the reasons set forth below, we disbar Buckley.

The facts as admitted by default show that Respondent has been a

member of the State Bar of Georgia since June 10, 1985. However,

1 The maximum penalty for violation of Rules 1.2, 1.3, and 5.5 (a) is disbarment. 1 Respondent is ineligible to practice law for failure to pay bar dues from 2015

to the present.

Furthermore, in State Disciplinary Board (“SDB”) Docket No. 6914,

Respondent represented the executors in a case pending in the Probate Court

of Cook County, Georgia. For his failure to respond to probate court orders,

a notice of investigation was filed and served on Respondent, but he filed no

response. Consequently, on April 26, 2016, this Court entered an order

suspending Respondent from the practice of law on an interim basis, which

suspension has not been lifted.

In SDB No. 6915, a client retained Respondent in September 2015 and

paid him a fee to represent her and file a civil action on her behalf. But as of

September 1, 2015, Respondent became ineligible to practice law for failure

to pay annual dues. Respondent took no action on behalf of the client and

has abandoned the matter the client entrusted to him. Nevertheless,

Respondent has not refunded the retainer fee the client paid, which

Respondent has not earned. A notice of investigation was served on

Respondent with respect to this matter, but he has not responded.

2 In SDB No. 6916, Respondent was retained by a client to prepare a

deed transferring ownership of real property from another individual to the

client. After receiving a retainer fee on February 3, 2015, Respondent has

not communicated at all with the client, has taken no action on the client’s

behalf, and has not refunded the fee that was paid. A notice of investigation

was served on Respondent with respect to this matter, but he has not

responded.

In SDB No. 6917, a client retained Respondent in April 2015 and paid

him a fee for Respondent to represent him and file a civil action on his

behalf. The client also entrusted to Respondent certain documents that

support his claim. Respondent has taken no action on the client’s behalf, has

abandoned the matter the client entrusted to him, has not refunded the

retainer fee, and has not returned supporting documents to the client. A

notice of investigation was served on Respondent with respect to this matter,

but he has not responded.

In SDB No. 6918, in March 2015, a woman paid a retainer fee to

Respondent to represent her husband in a pending criminal matter in Worth

County, Georgia. Respondent did not notify the client or the client’s wife

3 that he had become ineligible to practice law effective September 1, 2015.

Respondent has taken no action on behalf of the client and has abandoned the

matter. When the client’s wife became aware that Respondent had become

ineligible to practice law, she requested a refund, but Respondent has not

refunded the paid fee, which he has not earned. A notice of investigation was

served on Respondent with respect to this matter, but he has not responded.

Based on our review of the record, we agree with the State Bar that

disbarment is the appropriate sanction in this matter. Accordingly, the name

of Richard R. Buckley, Jr., is hereby removed from the rolls of attorneys

authorized to practice law in the State of Georgia. He is reminded of his

duties under Rule 4-219 (c).

Disbarred. All the Justices concur.

Decided April 17, 2017.

Disbarment.

Paula J. Frederick, General Counsel State Bar, Wolanda R. Shelton,

Jonathan W. Hewett, 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

In re Buckley
799 S.E.2d 158 (Supreme Court of Georgia, 2017)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
In the Matter of Richard R. Buckley, Jr, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/in-the-matter-of-richard-r-buckley-jr-ga-2017.