Justices skeptical of Atlanta lawyer’s disbarment defense

Georgia Supreme Court justices had a hard time Tuesday accepting arguments from an Atlanta-area immigration attorney fighting disbarment for allegedly abandoning half a dozen clients.

The State Bar claims Taylor, a member since 2002, has violated several rules of professional conduct since 2012 and should be disbarred.

Taylor, who cofounded a law firm in Norcross, acknowledged he dropped the ball on certain cases and said that a temporary suspension of up to one year is punishment enough. In court filings, he said he participated in the clients’ cases as much as his health would allow at the time.

The state Supreme Court decides whether and how lawyers are disciplined.

On Tuesday, several justices pointed out inconsistencies and flaws in Taylor’s arguments, including his assertion that the dysfunctional nature of federal immigration courts should weigh in his favor against his obligations as a Georgia lawyer.

Justice Benjamin Land said Taylor took full responsibility under the State Bar’s rules for representing his clients when he officially entered an appearance on their behalf in court.

“If you enter an appearance on behalf of a client, you’ve got obligations,” Land said. “Why does an immigration lawyer get a pass for that and everybody else doesn’t?”

Land also rejected Taylor’s argument that the small size of his firm made it acceptable for him to hand over cases to “self-supervising” associate attorneys he employed. Taylor let other lawyers handle five of his six cases at issue, in which he failed to attend court hearings, file documents and consult or meet with his clients, case records show.

“It makes no difference what size firm it is,” Land said.

Justice Sarah Hawkins Warren said she hadn’t heard anything from Taylor and couldn’t think of anything to persuade her that attorneys can escape responsibility under State Bar rules because of how federal immigration courts operate.

In response to a different argument by Taylor — that the six cases were doomed from the beginning because those immigrants had no right to stay in the U.S. — Chief Justice Nels Peterson asked if Taylor had committed fraud by taking their money.

Justice Charles Bethel said some of Taylor’s arguments were contradictory. He said Taylor initially “slow-played” his participation in the State Bar’s case and “took forever” to acknowledge some of the alleged misconduct.

While answering the justices’ questions, Taylor’s lawyer in the disciplinary case, Jerome Lee, acknowledged that some of Taylor’s recorded testimony was “not entirely accurate.” He said Taylor had used “hyperbole” when testifying that he was the counsel of record in 10,000 open immigration cases at a time, when the real number was “not even” 5,000.

But Lee said Taylor’s clients were not abandoned or prejudiced.

Andreea Morrison, the State Bar’s deputy general counsel, said Taylor’s abandonment of his clients prevented them from adequately arguing to stay in the country. She said some of the clients spent thousands of dollars getting different lawyers to help them after they fired Taylor.

Taylor’s attempt to escape disbarment by arguing he and his firm operated reasonably in an immigration law setting is insincere, Morrison said.