He Had To Eat

The Georgia Supreme Court has disbarred an attorney

Regarding S25Y0538, the Special Master determined that Lemoine had a duty to communicate and consult with the Clients, diligently perform the services that he had been hired to perform, and preserve his Clients’ funds, but had failed to meet these obligations. In assessing Lemoine’s mental state, the Special Master determined that Lemoine’s actions were knowing rather than inadvertent or negligent. Specifically, the Special Master determined that Lemoine was “acutely aware” that he was converting client and fiduciary funds for his own use or to pay others, as he testified at the evidentiary hearing that he used money that did not belong to him to fill a “hole” that had been created by his own conduct in not monitoring his bank account and used these funds to pay the client “that screams the loudest.” Further, Lemoine knowingly disregarded the Clients’ direction to return their money. In assessing the injury caused, the Special Master determined that the Clients, who were elderly and vulnerable, suffered significant harm and had to sell other property to satisfy financial obligations due to Lemoine stealing their money, and that Lemoine caused harm to the legal system and profession by converting hundreds of thousands of dollars that did not belong to him.

Respondent’s contention

the record shows that the Special Master considered Lemoine’s claim that he commingled client and fiduciary funds with his own and used fiduciary funds to compensate other clients because he was “targeted by scammers,” and found that any fraudulent issues with Lemoine’s account was created by his own conduct in failing to monitor the account. Lemoine testified that he received and deposited into his IOLTA account a “fake check” received from a client in the amount of $140,092 and then disbursed funds from his account before realizing he had been given “a bad check,” such that “a hole of $140,000 in [his] IOLTA account” was created. However, during the evidentiary hearing, in response to counsel for the State Bar asking Lemoine how long it took for him to notice the deficit in his account, Lemoine replied “five or six months.” Further, Lemoine admitted that he was “[n]ot always” looking at his IOLTA account on a monthly basis, and that, upon his contacting the client who delivered the fake check after several  months, the client had “disappeared.” See Tuggle, 317 Ga. at 258 (noting this Court’s authority to rely on undisputed material facts, even when not contained in the Special Master’s report).

Additionally, the record supports the Special Master’s finding that Lemoine used fiduciary funds for his personal use, as during his deposition testimony, when Lemoine was asked about several transfers he made from his IOLTA account containing the buyer’s funds to his operating account, he stated that he did not remember what those transfers were for or why he had made them, but that the transfers had been authorized and he had not used client or fiduciary funds for his own personal use. Yet, later during his deposition, Lemoine testified that only “some” of the transfers from the IOLTA account were authorized and that he was “defrauded by a crook” and “in the meantime, [he] still ha[s] to eat.” Thus, based on this testimony, the Special Master was authorized to infer that Lemoine used the funds for his own personal expenses and livelihood.

Sanction

after considering the record, we agree with the Special Master that disbarment is the appropriate sanction in this matter and that this sanction is consistent with prior cases disbarring lawyers for similar conduct.

(Mike Frisch)