In the Supreme Court of Georgia
Decided: October 5, 2015
S15Y1787. IN THE MATTER OF THOMAS J. FORD, III.
PER CURIAM.
This disciplinary matter is before the Court on the petition for voluntary
discipline filed by Respondent Thomas J. Ford III (State Bar No. 268235),
pursuant to Bar Rule 4-227 (b) (2), in which he seeks to resolve a pending
disciplinary matter involving his representation of a client in a murder case. In
his petition, Ford admits that his conduct in that case violated Rules 1.4 and 1.16
(a) of the Georgia Rules of Professional Conduct, see Bar Rule 4-102 (d). The
maximum sanction for a violation of Rules 1.4 and 1.16 is a public reprimand.
Ford, who has been a member of the Bar since 1996, acknowledges that
his representation was ineffective in a case in which he represented a woman
where she and her daughter were both charged with murder. The woman and
her daughter had retained a lawyer to represent them, but, after they had paid the
lawyer’s fee, the lawyer was removed because of a conflict. The retained lawyer
did not return the fee, however, resulting in Ford taking the woman’s case for
a reduced fee and with no money for experts. Although the need for a forensic
pathologist was clear to Ford, he relied on the daughter’s court-appointed
counsel to obtain the services of one. Ford admits that, when it became clear
that an expert had not been retained, he should have consulted with his client
regarding the impact on her case and moved for a continuance so that a forensic
pathologist could be retained. Ford states that he therefore was not prepared for
trial, which resulted in the jury returning a guilty verdict against his
client–although her motion for new trial, presented by new counsel, has been
granted.
Ford acknowledges that he received an Investigative Panel reprimand in
September 2014. In mitigation, Ford states that, during the time of his
representation of this client, he was in the midst of the dissolution of his prior
marriage and the beginning of his relationship with the woman who is now his
wife. In addition to the stress and distraction caused by this situation, Ford
began to drink to excess, which led to an arrest for DUI. Ford pled guilty to the
DUI and has complied with the conditions of his probation, changed his
behavior, and met with a counselor, who has determined that Ford does not have
an addiction to alcohol. Both Ford’s ex- and current wives submitted affidavits
2
attesting to the positive changes that Ford has made. Finally, Ford notes that he
did not take the case in question out of greed or from a failure to appreciate the
seriousness of the case, but instead because he believed in his client’s innocence.
Ford argues that a Review Panel reprimand is the appropriate punishment in this
case and seeks to have this Court impose such as discipline. In response, the
State Bar recommends that this Court accept Ford’s suggested discipline.
Having reviewed the petition and response, we agree that imposition of
a Review Panel reprimand is the appropriate sanction in this matter, and we
therefore accept the petition for voluntary discipline. Accordingly, the Court
hereby orders that Ford receive a Review Panel reprimand in accordance with
Bar Rules 4-102 (b) (4) and 4-220 (b) for his violation of Bar Rules 1.4 and
1.16.
Petition for voluntary discipline accepted. Review Panel reprimand. All
the Justices concur.
3