In the Matter of Steven Ryan Webster
This text of 896 S.E.2d 546 (In the Matter of Steven Ryan Webster) 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
318 Ga. 27 FINAL COPY
S24Y0019. IN THE MATTER OF STEVEN RYAN WEBSTER.
PER CURIAM.
This disciplinary matter is before the Court on a petition for
voluntary discipline filed by Steven Ryan Webster (State Bar No.
745245) prior to the issuance of a formal complaint. See Bar Rule 4-
227 (b). In his petition, which concerns five underlying disciplinary
matters, Webster, who has been a member of the State Bar of
Georgia since 1992, admits that he violated Rules 1.15 (I) (a) and (c)
and 1.15 (II) (b) of the Georgia Rules of Professional Conduct found
in Bar Rule 4-102 (d) and requests that this Court accept the
voluntary surrender of his license to practice law, which he
acknowledges is tantamount to disbarment. See Rule 1.0 (s). The
State Bar has responded to Webster’s petition, recommending that
the Court accept the discipline proposed, and we agree to do so.
With regard to State Disciplinary Board Docket (“SDBD”) No.
7749, Webster admits he was the closing attorney for the sale of a property and that on May 17, 2022, the purchaser wired $6,000 in
earnest money to be held by Webster. On June 25, 2022, the
purchase agreement was terminated such that the purchaser was to
receive the earnest money held by Webster. Webster mailed a check
for $6,000 to the purchaser, but it was returned for insufficient
funds. Webster did not respond to the purchaser’s requests for the
funds.
Regarding SDBD No. 7750, Webster admits he was the closing
attorney for the sale of a property. The closing took place on June 3,
2022, and the proceeds from the sale of the home were wired to
Webster’s firm. After putting $200,000 toward the seller’s new
mortgage, the seller was still owed $70,677.98 from the proceeds of
the sale. Webster wrote a check for that amount which the seller
deposited, but the check was returned for insufficient funds. When
the seller contacted Webster, he told her that his account was short
$380,000 and that his bank had frozen his account. Webster used
his personal funds to pay the seller and wired the money to her on
July 7, 2022.
2 Regarding SDBD No. 7751, Webster admits he was signed as a
title insurance agent by a title company in 2013. As part of his
agency agreement, Webster issued title insurance for his clients and
provided various settlement services. But Webster failed to provide
reconciliations for the title company’s review, failed to remit
premiums collected for the title insurance policies, and failed to
issue policies. The title company terminated Webster’s agency in
May 2022 and requested that Webster disburse funds owed to the
title company. Webster failed to respond to the requests.
Regarding SDBD No. 7752, Webster admits he was the closing
attorney for a property. Webster was supposed to disburse funds
pursuant to a closing disclosure, including a payment to an
insurance company for the purchaser’s homeowners’ insurance
policy. Webster failed to disburse the funds and failed to remit the
insurance payment, which caused the insurance to lapse in July
2022. Webster failed to respond to the purchaser’s e-mails and phone
calls.
3 Regarding SDBD No. 7753, Webster admits that, in June 2022,
the State Bar of Georgia received a notice from Webster’s bank that
four checks totaling $52,221.40 were returned unpaid on Webster’s
attorney trust account number because his trust account balance
was insufficient to pay the items. The bank froze Webster’s bank
accounts and then sent additional documentation to the State Bar
reflecting that multiple checks totaling over $400,000 had been
returned unpaid on Webster’s trust account. Because Webster has
approximately $18,000 in one of the bank accounts, the bank is filing
an interpleader action to distribute those funds to the affected
clients. Webster admits that he moved funds from his trust account
to his operating account to pay business expenses.
By this conduct, Webster admits he violated Rule 1.15 (I) (a)
and (c) when he (1) failed to safeguard fiduciary funds; (2) failed to
maintain complete records of account funds; (3) failed to promptly
deliver funds that third persons were entitled to; and (4) failed to
render a full accounting of the funds in his possession when it was
requested. Further, Webster admits he violated Rule 1.15 (II) (b)
4 when he (1) withdrew funds from the trust account and deposited
the funds into his firm’s operating account for business purposes,
which constitutes personal use under Rule 1.15 (II) (b); and (2) failed
to maintain records reflecting at all times the exact balance held for
each client or third person. Webster acknowledges that the
maximum punishment for a violation of any of these Rules is
disbarment and that voluntary surrender of his license to practice
law is tantamount to disbarment. See Rule 1.0 (s). See also In the
Matter of Williams, 291 Ga. 659 (732 SE2d 85) (2012); In the Matter
of Campbell, 282 Ga. 688 (653 SE2d 51) (2007).
The State Bar filed a response and asserts that Webster’s
petition contains admissions of fact and conduct sufficient to
authorize the imposition of the discipline he has requested. It claims
that Webster’s absence of a prior disciplinary record may be
considered in mitigation, see American Bar Association’s Standards
for Imposing Lawyer Sanctions (“ABA Standards”), Standard 9.32
(a), and that Webster’s dishonest or selfish motive; pattern of
misconduct; and multiple offenses may be considered in
5 aggravation, see ABA Standard 9.22 (b), (c), and (d). The State Bar
notes that previous disciplinary cases addressing violations of Rules
1.15 (I) and 1.15 (II) have resulted in disbarment. See In the Matter
of Arrington, 314 Ga. 696, 698-699 (878 SE2d 534) (2022) (disbarring
attorney who violated Rules 1.15 (I) (a) and 1.15 (II) (b)); In the
Matter of Bunch, 314 Ga. 423, 424-425 (877 SE2d 274) (2022)
(accepting voluntary surrender of license where attorney violated
Rules 1.3, 1.15 (I) (a) and (c), 1.15 (II) (a) and (b), and 3.2); In the
Matter of Stuhler, 291 Ga. 660, 660-661 (732 SE2d 84) (2012)
(accepting voluntary surrender of license where attorney violated
Rules 1.15 (I) (a) and (b) and 1.15 (II) (b)). Accordingly, the State Bar
recommends that the Court accept Webster’s petition.
We have reviewed the record and agree to accept Webster’s
petition for voluntary discipline wherein he requests that this Court
accept the voluntary surrender of his license, which is tantamount
to disbarment. Accordingly, it is ordered that the name of Steven
Ryan Webster be removed from the rolls of persons authorized to
6 practice law in the State of Georgia. Webster is reminded of his
duties pursuant to Bar Rule 4-219 (b).
Voluntary surrender of license accepted. All the Justices concur.
Decided December 19, 2023.
Voluntary surrender of license.
Webster Law Group, Craig A. Webster, for Webster.
Paula J. Frederick, General Counsel State Bar, William D.
NeSmith III, Deputy General Counsel State Bar, Jenny K.
Mittelman, Andreea N. Morrison, 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
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
896 S.E.2d 546, 318 Ga. 27, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/in-the-matter-of-steven-ryan-webster-ga-2023.