Court Opinion

ID: 9911052
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-12-19 14:02:26.096543+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T12:55:40.434405
License: Public Domain

NOTICE: This opinion is subject to modification resulting from motions for reconsideration under Supreme Court
Rule 27, the Court’s reconsideration, and editorial revisions by the Reporter of Decisions. The version of the
opinion published in the Advance Sheets for the Georgia Reports, designated as the “Final Copy,” will replace any
prior version on the Court’s website and docket. A bound volume of the Georgia Reports will contain the final and
official text of the opinion.
In the Supreme Court of Georgia

                                                   Decided: December 19, 2023

   S24Y0019. IN THE MATTER OF STEVEN RYAN WEBSTER.

        PER CURIAM.

        This disciplinary matter is before the Court on a petition for

voluntary discipline filed by Steven Ryan Webster (State Bar No.

745245) prior to the issuance of a formal complaint. See Bar Rule 4-

227 (b). In his petition, which concerns five underlying disciplinary

matters, Webster, who has been a member of the State Bar of

Georgia since 1992, admits that he violated Rules 1.15 (I) (a) and (c)

and 1.15 (II) (b) of the Georgia Rules of Professional Conduct found

in Bar Rule 4-102 (d) and requests that this Court accept the

voluntary surrender of his license to practice law, which he

acknowledges is tantamount to disbarment. See Rule 1.0 (s). The

State Bar has responded to Webster’s petition, recommending that

the Court accept the discipline proposed, and we agree to do so.
     With regard to State Disciplinary Board Docket (“SDBD”) No.

7749, Webster admits he was the closing attorney for the sale of a

property and that on May 17, 2022, the purchaser wired $6,000 in

earnest money to be held by Webster. On June 25, 2022, the

purchase agreement was terminated such that the purchaser was to

receive the earnest money held by Webster. Webster mailed a check

for $6,000 to the purchaser, but it was returned for insufficient

funds. Webster did not respond to the purchaser’s requests for the

funds.

     Regarding SDBD No. 7750, Webster admits he was the closing

attorney for the sale of a property. The closing took place on June 3,

2022, and the proceeds from the sale of the home were wired to

Webster’s firm. After putting $200,000 toward the seller’s new

mortgage, the seller was still owed $70,677.98 from the proceeds of

the sale. Webster wrote a check for that amount which the seller

deposited, but the check was returned for insufficient funds. When

the seller contacted Webster. he told her that his account was short

$380,000 and that his bank had frozen his account. Webster used

                                  2
his personal funds to pay the seller and wired the money to her on

July 7, 2022.

     Regarding SDBD No. 7751, Webster admits he was signed as a

title insurance agent by a title company in 2013. As part of his

agency agreement, Webster issued title insurance for his clients and

provided various settlement services. But Webster failed to provide

reconciliations for the title company’s review, failed to remit

premiums collected for the title insurance policies, and failed to

issue policies. The title company terminated Webster’s agency in

May 2022 and requested that Webster disburse funds owed to the

title company. Webster failed to respond to the requests.

     Regarding SDBD No. 7752, Webster admits he was the closing

attorney for a property. Webster was supposed to disburse funds

pursuant to a closing disclosure, including a payment to an

insurance company for the purchaser’s homeowners’ insurance

policy. Webster failed to disburse the funds and failed to remit the

insurance payment, which caused the insurance to lapse in July

                                 3
2022. Webster failed to respond to the purchaser’s emails and phone

calls.

         Regarding SDBD No. 7753, Webster admits that, in June 2022,

the State Bar of Georgia received a notice from Webster’s bank that

four checks totaling $52,221.40 were returned unpaid on Webster’s

attorney trust account number because his trust account balance

was insufficient to pay the items. The bank froze Webster’s bank

accounts and then sent additional documentation to the State Bar

reflecting that multiple checks totaling over $400,000 had been

returned unpaid on Webster’s trust account. Because Webster has

approximately $18,000 in one of the bank accounts, the bank is filing

an interpleader action to distribute those funds to the affected

clients. Webster admits that he moved funds from his trust account

to his operating account to pay business expenses.

         By this conduct, Webster admits he violated Rule 1.15 (I) (a)

and (c) when he (1) failed to safeguard fiduciary funds; (2) failed to

maintain complete records of account funds; (3) failed to promptly

deliver funds that third persons were entitled to; and (4) failed to

                                    4
render a full accounting of the funds in his possession when it was

requested.   Further, Webster admits he violated Rule 1.15 (II) (b)

when he (1) withdrew funds from the trust account and deposited

the funds into his firm’s operating account for business purposes,

which constitutes personal use under Rule 1.15 (II) (b); and (2) failed

to maintain records reflecting at all times the exact balance held for

each client or third person. Webster acknowledges that the

maximum punishment for a violation of any of these Rules is

disbarment and that voluntary surrender of his license to practice

law is tantamount to disbarment. See Rule 1.0 (s). See also In the

Matter of Williams, 291 Ga. 659 (732 SE2d 85) (2012); In the Matter

of Campbell, 282 Ga. 688 (653 SE2d 51) (2007).

     The State Bar filed a response and asserts that Webster’s

petition contains admissions of fact and conduct sufficient to

authorize the imposition of the discipline he has requested. It claims

that Webster’s absence of a prior disciplinary record may be

considered in mitigation, see American Bar Association’s Standards

for Imposing Lawyer Sanctions (“ABA Standards”), Standard 9.32

                                  5
(a), and that Webster’s dishonest or selfish motive; pattern of

misconduct; and     multiple     offenses    may    be    considered in

aggravation, see ABA Standard 9.22 (b), (c), and (d). The State Bar

notes that previous disciplinary cases addressing violations of Rules

1.15 (I) and 1.15 (II) have resulted in disbarment. See In the Matter

of Arrington, 314 Ga. 696, 698-99 (878 SE2d 534) (2022) (disbarring

attorney who violated Rules 1.15 (I) (a) and 1.15 (II) (b)); In the

Matter of Bunch, 314 Ga. 423, 424-25 (877 SE2d 274) (2022)

(accepting voluntary surrender of license where attorney violated

Rules 1.3, 1.15 (I) (a) and (c), 1.15 (II) (a) and (b), and 3.2); In the

Matter of Stuhler, 291 Ga. 660, 660-61 (732 SE2d 84) (2012)

(accepting voluntary surrender of license where attorney violated

Rules 1.15 (I) (a) and (b) and 1.15 (II) (b)). Accordingly, the State Bar

recommends that the Court accept Webster’s petition.

     We have reviewed the record and agree to accept Webster’s

petition for voluntary discipline wherein he requests that this Court

accept the voluntary surrender of his license, which is tantamount

to disbarment. Accordingly, it is ordered that the name of Steven

                                   6
Ryan Webster be removed from the rolls of persons authorized to

practice law in the State of Georgia. Webster is reminded of his

duties pursuant to Bar Rule 4-219 (b).

     Voluntary surrender of license accepted. All the Justices concur.

                                  7