Summary
The Georgia Supreme Court disbarred Harold Michael Harvey for practicing law during a prior suspension, maintaining law-firm and trust accounts, misusing another attorney’s name, and neglecting a client’s personal-injury claim. The Court found no mitigating factors and emphasized Harvey’s disregard for disciplinary orders, lack of remorse, prior disciplinary history, and abandonment of his client’s claim.
Topics
Practice areas
Questions Presented
- Whether Harvey violated the charged Georgia Bar Rules through continued practice-related conduct during suspension, mishandling of client funds, use of another attorney's name, and neglect of a client matter.
- Whether Harvey's prior contempt proceeding barred use of related claims or evidence under res judicata.
- Whether disbarment was the appropriate sanction in light of Harvey's misconduct and disciplinary history.
Holdings
- Harvey's conduct warranted disbarment for violations of Rules 1.3, 1.4, 1.15 (I), 1.15 (II), 5.5, 7.5, and 8.4 of Bar Rule 4-102 (d).
- Harvey's res judicata argument failed because he did not introduce the portions of the prior contempt proceeding's record necessary to establish the defense; the prior order alone was insufficient.
- Disbarment was warranted, and Harvey's name was ordered removed from the rolls of persons authorized to practice law in Georgia.
Key quotations
“In light of Harvey’s pattern of neglect in his handling of legal matters and his obvious disregard for the rules and ethics under which lawyers are allowed and privileged to practice law in this State, we hereby order that the name of Harold Michael Harvey be removed from the rolls of individuals authorized to practice law in Georgia.” (279 Ga. 877)
“We find no merit to Harvey’s argument that he contacted his client in time for her to obtain another lawyer and file her lawsuit as he did not inform her that she had only a few days until the limitation period expired, particularly as Harvey had other contact information for the client in addition to regular mail (telephone and e-mail) and Harvey had neglected the case for months before his suspension.” (279 Ga. 877)
Factual background
Despite a prior suspension, Harvey continued to maintain and operate a law office, permitted staff to use the firm's letterhead, maintained operating and trust accounts, and deposited client funds into accounts opened after his suspension. He also attempted to file a probate petition using the name of another attorney and issued a check that was returned for insufficient funds. In a separate personal-injury matter, Harvey neglected the client's claim, failed to file suit before the limitations period expired, and did not adequately notify the client that only a few days remained to preserve her rights.
Procedural history
Harvey had previously been suspended for two years and later received an additional two-year suspension for contempt of the suspension order. The State Bar filed Formal Complaints based on his continued practice-related conduct, mishandling of client funds, and neglect of a personal-injury matter. The special master found the charged violations and recommended disbarment; Harvey filed exceptions, but the Review Panel unanimously recommended disbarment, which the Supreme Court adopted.