In the Matter of Woodard

515 S.E.2d 147, 270 Ga. 891, 99 Fulton County D. Rep. 1325, 1999 Ga. LEXIS 334
CourtSupreme Court of Georgia
DecidedApril 12, 1999
DocketS99Y0319
StatusPublished
Cited by5 cases

This text of 515 S.E.2d 147 (In the Matter of Woodard) 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 Woodard, 515 S.E.2d 147, 270 Ga. 891, 99 Fulton County D. Rep. 1325, 1999 Ga. LEXIS 334 (Ga. 1999).

Opinion

Per curiam.

The State Bar filed a Notice of Discipline against Respondent Daniel Prince Woodard alleging violations of Standards 22 (withdrawal from employment without taking reasonable steps to avoid foreseeable prejudice to the rights of the client, including giving due notice to the client, allowing time for employment of other counsel, delivering to the client all papers and property to which the client is entitled, and complying with applicable laws and rules); 44 (wilful abandonment or disregard of a legal matter to the client’s detriment); and 68 (failure to respond to disciplinary authorities) of Bar Rule 4-102 (d). Upon Woodard’s failure to reject the Notice of Discipline within the time set by Bar Rule 4-208.3 (a), Woodard was in default pursuant to Bar Rule 4-208.1 (b) and subject to discipline by this Court. The State Bar has recommended disbarment as the appropriate sanction for Woodard’s violations of Standards 22, 44, and 68. We agree.

Woodard was hired to represent a client in a personal injury case and filed suit on her behalf. Other than forwarding copies of interrogatories served by the adverse party, however, Woodard never again contacted the client, failed to respond to her phone calls and certified letters, and abandoned her case. The State Bar noted as aggravating factors in support of its recommendation of disbarment Woodard’s interim suspension on October 19, 1998 and his substantial experience in the practice of law.

We agree with the State Bar that disbarment is warranted as a result of Woodard’s violations of Standards 22, 44, and 68 of Bar Rule 4-102 (d). Accordingly, Woodard is hereby disbarred from the practice of law in Georgia. He is reminded of his duties under Bar Rule 4-219 (c).

Disbarred.

All the Justices concur.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Related

In Re Erion
538 S.E.2d 427 (Supreme Court of Georgia, 2000)
In Re Zoota
532 S.E.2d 107 (Supreme Court of Georgia, 2000)
In Re Lumpkin
515 S.E.2d 147 (Supreme Court of Georgia, 1999)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
515 S.E.2d 147, 270 Ga. 891, 99 Fulton County D. Rep. 1325, 1999 Ga. LEXIS 334, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/in-the-matter-of-woodard-ga-1999.