O.C.G.A.

O.C.G.A. § 15-19-31 (2019)

Adoption of rules for organization and government of State Bar

✓ O.C.G.A. — 2019 edition (Public.Resource.Org Release 73)

Code text and O.C.G.A. statutory annotations on this page reflect the 2019 Official Code of Georgia Annotated (Public.Resource.Org Release 73, 2019-08-21; public domain per Georgia v. Public.Resource.Org, 2020). The Syfert case-law annotations in Notes of Decisions, below, are current.

Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section GA-LEGlegis.ga.gov (official) JustiaJustia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar

The Supreme Court shall have the authority by appropriate orders, upon recommendation made by the State Bar of Georgia, to adopt rules and regulations for the organization and government of the unified state bar and to define the rights, duties, and obligations of the members therein, including the payment of a reasonable license fee, and otherwise to regulate and govern the practice of law in this state, to the end that the unified state bar shall promote the best interest of the public by maintaining high standards of conduct in the legal profession and by aiding in the efficient administration of justice.

History

(Ga. L. 1963, p. 70, § 2.)

Annotations

Law reviews. - For article discussing the proposed Georgia plan for specializa-

tion in the legal field, see 12 Ga. St. B.J. 171 (1976).

JUDICIAL DECISIONS Supreme Court has the inherent power to govern the practice of law in this state. Fleming v. State, 246 Ga. 90, 270 S.E.2d 185, cert. denied, 449 U.S. 904, 101 S. Ct. 278, 66 L. Ed. 2d 136 (1980). Unconstitutional regulation of

practice of law. - Occupational tax ordinance levied on professionals and requiring registration and a fee payment at the beginning of each year, prior to the transaction of business, operated as an unconstitutional precondition on the prac-

tice of law. Sexton v. City of Jonesboro, 267 Ga. 571, 481 S.E.2d 818 (1997). Ordinance regulating legal profession unconstitutional. - Ordinance of the City of Savannah which purported to license attorneys at law practicing in that city was regulatory in nature and contravened Ga. Const. 1945, Art. I, Sec. II, Para. VII (see now Ga. Const. 1983, Art. III, Sec. VI, Para. IV), for the reason that the power to license and regulate attorneys at law is vested in the Supreme Court of the State of Georgia and administered through that court and through the State Bar of Georgia pursuant to Ga. L. 1963, p. 70, §§ 1 and 2 (see now O.C.G.A. §§ 15-19-30 and 15-19-31). Silverman v. Mayor of Savannah, 125 Ga. App. 41, 186 S.E.2d 447 (1971). Doctrine of judicial immunity. - Since it was the Georgia Supreme Court,

and not the State Bar, that ordered the suspension of the plaintiff, the act was clearly a judicial act within the constitutional power of the State Supreme Court and the State Bar was entitled to judicial immunity from liability for damages. Cohran v. State Bar, 790 F. Supp. 1568 (N.D. Ga. 1992). Municipality barred from regulating legal profession. - No municipality may, by regulatory licensing ordinance, regulate the legal profession, although a municipality may levy an occupational or license tax upon the practice of law within its municipal limits. Silverman v. Mayor of Savannah, 125 Ga. App. 41, 186 S.E.2d 447 (1971). Cited in State Bar v. Ellis, 116 Ga. App. 721, 158 S.E.2d 280 (1967); Zagoria v. DuBose Enters., Inc., 163 Ga. App. 880, 296 S.E.2d 353 (1982).

RESEARCH REFERENCES Am. Jur. 2d. - 7 Am. Jur. 2d, Attorneys at Law, § 7. C.J.S. - 7 C.J.S., Attorney and Client, § 43.

ALR. - Misconduct of one partner in a law firm as a factor in disbarment or other disciplinary proceedings against other partner, 157 ALR 613.

Notes of Decisions

Cited in 7 cases (2 in the last 5 years), 1992–2022 · leading case: Jefferson v. Stripling, 728 S.E.2d 826 (Ga. Ct. App. 2012).

Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment

Jefferson v. Stripling, 728 S.E.2d 826 (Ga. Ct. App. 2012). · cites it 2× “” As provided in OCGA § 15-19-31, the Supreme Court issued orders adopting rules and regulations for the organization and government of the state bar and to regulate the practice of law in this state, pursuant to which the State Disciplinary Board, composed of *200 the…”

Falanga v. State Bar of Georgia, 150 F.3d 1333 (11th Cir. 1998). · cites it 2× “O.C.G.A. § 15-19-31 (Michie 1994). Pursuant to legislative permission, the supreme court established "as an administrative arm of the court a unified self-governing bar association .”

Cohran v. State Bar of Georgia, 790 F. Supp. 1568 (N.D. Ga. 1992). · cites it 2× “O.C.G.A. § 15-19-31. Punishment imposed by the state bar is a judicial act.”

Prince v. Bailey Davis, LLC, 701 S.E.2d 492 (Ga. Ct. App. 2010). · cites it 2× “In this capacity, the State Bar recommended, and the Supreme Court approved, the creation of the AFD program to provide an alternative method to traditional litigation to resolve disputes between lawyers and clients over fees.”

Clark v. Cobb Cnty., City of Marietta (N.D. Ga. 2022). · cites it 2× “1992) (applying O.C.G.A. § 15-19-31)). 16 Id. entirety. IV.”

Clark v. State Bar of GA (N.D. Ga. 2022). · cites it 2× “1992) (applying O.C.G.A. § 15-19-31)). 16 Id. entirety. IV.”

Sherri Jefferson v. Frances Stripling (Ga. Ct. App. 2012). · cites it 2× “” As provided in OCGA § 15-19-31, the Supreme Court issued orders adopting rules and regulations for the organization and government of the state bar and to regulate the practice of law in this state, pursuant to which the State Disciplinary Board, composed of the Investigative…”

Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.