FINAL COPY
294 Ga. 482
S14Y0171. IN THE MATTER OF ERIC C. LANG.
PER CURIAM.
This disciplinary matter is before the Court on the petition of Eric C. Lang
(State Bar No. 435515) for voluntary discipline in which he seeks a six-month
suspension to run consecutively to the existing 12-month suspension imposed
following Lang’s filing of an earlier petition for voluntary discipline. In the
Matter of Lang, 292 Ga. 894 (741 SE2d 152) (2013).
According to the petition, Lang, who was admitted to the Bar in 1990,
represented a client who had been sued on a note. Summary judgment was
granted against the client in 2012 on all issues except damages. On May 1,
2013, while the prior petition for voluntary discipline was pending in this Court,
there was a final hearing on damages, and judgment was entered against the
client. Lang did not tell the client of the hearing or of the judgment entered
against him. When this Court imposed its suspension on Lang on May 6, 2013,
Lang informed his client of the suspension, but still did not tell his client about
the unfavorable judgment. The client learned of the judgment in July 2013
when he received a notice of garnishment. When asked for an explanation,
Lang finally disclosed the result of the May 1 hearing.
Lang admits that by this conduct he violated Rules 1.3 and 1.4 of the
Georgia Rules of Professional Conduct found in Bar Rule 4-102 (d). The
maximum sanction for a violation of Rule 1.3 is disbarment, and the maximum
sanction for a violation of Rule 1.4 is a public reprimand.
In mitigation, Lang offers that he was experiencing emotional problems
during the relevant time, including continuing treatment for bipolar disorder and
major depressive disorder, as well as the circumstances set forth in the earlier
petition, see Lang, 292 Ga. at 895-896. Lang states that his treatment is ongoing
and involves adjustments to medication, which adjustments are not yet
complete. Lang also submits that he has attempted to mitigate any damages to
his client by arranging and paying for substitute counsel, assisting substitute
counsel (within the bounds permitted by his suspension) by providing an
affidavit in support of the client’s motion for out-of-time appeal, and by
conducting research related to the garnishment action that uncovered an
underlying error that should lead to significant financial benefit to his client.
Lang further states that he has otherwise exhibited good character, integrity, and
reputation, and is deeply remorseful and has apologized to his client. He also
2
notes that while he can apply for reinstatement as early as May 6, 2014, the
suspension is actually indefinite, until such time as he can receive certification
that he is mentally fit to practice law.
The Bar requests that the Court reject the petition. It notes that Lang’s
neglect in his representation of his client occurred while the prior petition was
pending and that in connection with that prior petition, Lang represented that he
was working to completely eliminate any instances in which he worked directly
for clients. The Bar also notes that in addition to the ongoing suspension, Lang
received an Investigative Panel Reprimand in 2008.
In light of the record, we reject Lang’s petition for voluntary discipline.
We conclude that a six-month consecutive suspension is inadequate under these
circumstances, especially considering that Lang’s actions in neglecting a client’s
matter occurred during the pendency of the prior petition for voluntary
discipline.
Petition for voluntary discipline rejected. All the Justices concur.
3
Decided January 27, 2014.
Petition for voluntary discipline.
Peters, Rubin & Sheffield, Robert G. Rubin, for Lang.
Paula J. Frederick, General Counsel State Bar, Jenny K. Mittelman,
Assistant General Counsel State Bar, for State Bar of Georgia.
4