in the Matter of Nicholas Pagano ( 2016 )


Menu:
  • In the Supreme Court of Georgia
    Decided:     January 19, 2016
    S16Y0126. IN THE MATTER OF NICHOLAS PAGANO.
    PER CURIAM.
    This disciplinary matter is before the Court on the petition for voluntary
    discipline filed by Nicholas Pagano (State Bar No. 558935) prior to the issuance
    of a formal complaint. Pagano seeks a Review Panel reprimand for conduct
    involving the abandonment of one client’s matter and the State Bar recommends
    that the Court accept Pagano’s petition.
    With regard to this matter, Pagano, who has been a member of the State
    Bar since 1986, admits that in 2008 a client hired him to represent her in a
    personal injury action; that he filed suit on the client’s behalf in July 2008; that
    although he did some initial work on the client’s case, he eventually stopped
    communicating with her; that he failed to appear at two separate calendar calls
    relating to the case; that at the second calendar call, the judge dismissed the
    client’s case for want of prosecution; and that he did not tell the client the
    dismissal resulted from his failure to appear. Pagano admits that by his actions,
    he violated Rules 1.3 and 1.4 of the Georgia Rules of Professional Conduct, see
    Bar Rule 4-102 (d). The maximum penalty for a violation of Rule 1.3 is
    disbarment, while the maximum penalty for a violation of Rule 1.4 is a public
    reprimand.
    In mitigation, we note that Pagano is remorseful; that he did not act with
    a dishonest or selfish motive; that he has been hampered by significant eye and
    vision problems in recent years; and that he displayed a cooperative attitude
    toward the disciplinary proceedings. In aggravation, we note that Pagano
    received an Investigative Panel reprimand in 1992 and a Formal Letter of
    Admonition in 2002 and that he admits that he had “no excuse or reason” for his
    conduct in this matter.
    The State Bar responded to the petition, asserting that a reprimand is the
    appropriate sanction in this matter, see In the Matter of King, 
    289 Ga. 457
    (712
    SE2d 70) (2011) (Review Panel reprimand resolving one disciplinary case
    arising from abandonment of a civil matter; prior Investigative Panel
    reprimand); In the Matter of Shapiro, 
    288 Ga. 455
    , 704 SE2d 784 (2011)
    (Review Panel reprimand resolving two disciplinary cases; prior Investigative
    Panel reprimand and two Formal Letters of Admonition), and recommending
    2
    that the Court accept the petition.
    Having reviewed the record we agree that a Review Panel reprimand is an
    appropriate sanction in this matter. Accordingly, the Court hereby orders that
    Pagano receive a Review Panel reprimand in accordance with Bar Rules 4-102
    (b) (4) and 4-220 for his admitted violations of Rules 1.3 and 1.4.
    Petition for voluntary discipline accepted. Review Panel reprimand.
    All the Justices concur.
    3
    

Document Info

Docket Number: S16Y0126

Filed Date: 1/19/2016

Precedential Status: Precedential

Modified Date: 1/19/2016