Summary: In the Matter of Charles Bruce Singleton, Jr. (Ga. 2026)
Court: Supreme Court of Georgia Decided: March 17, 2026 Outcome: Disbarment
Background
Charles Bruce Singleton, Jr., a Georgia attorney admitted to the bar in 1996, was disbarred following disciplinary proceedings arising from misconduct across three separate client matters. The State Disciplinary Review Board and Special Master both recommended disbarment, and Singleton did not challenge that recommendation before the Supreme Court.
The Three Client Matters
Matter 1 (Probate — Docket 7664): Singleton was hired to probate a client’s mother’s will, accepted a $1,000 retainer, filed initial documents, and then went completely silent. He ignored repeated client emails, failed to file required heir notification letters, and never refunded the unearned fee even after being terminated.
Matter 2 (Credit Card Lawsuit — Docket 7665): Singleton was hired to defend a client in a bank lawsuit. He missed the answer deadline, failed to disclose a default judgment against his client, negotiated a settlement he never communicated to the client, and allowed a lien to be placed on her home. The client suffered lasting credit damage and could not refinance her home.
Matter 3 (Minor’s Settlement Funds — Docket 7830): This was the most serious matter. Singleton held $35,388.83 in settlement funds belonging to an injured minor in his trust account and refused to release them despite multiple court orders. He was held in civil contempt and briefly incarcerated. As of April 2025, he had repaid only $14,500 of the $35,388.83 owed. The court in this matter held the lawyer in contempt. Despite the contempt finding, the lawyer did not release the funds to the client.
Rules Violated
The Court found violations of the following Georgia Rules of Professional Conduct:
- Rule 1.2(a) — Failing to abide by client decisions and consult on representation
- Rule 1.3 — Lack of diligence and promptness
- Rule 1.4(a) — Failure to communicate with clients
- Rule 1.15(I)(a) — Failure to safeguard client funds
- Rule 1.16(d) — Failure to return unearned fees upon termination
- Rule 8.4(a)(4) — Dishonesty, fraud, deceit, or misrepresentation (conversion of client funds)
The Court declined to reach the Rule 3.5(d) charge (disrupting a tribunal), finding disbarment warranted on the other violations alone.
Aggravating & Mitigating Factors
Aggravating (7 factors):
- Prior disciplinary offense (confidential reprimand, January 2020)
- Dishonest or selfish motive
- Pattern of misconduct across multiple clients
- Multiple rule violations
- Vulnerable victims (grieving family, injured minor)
- Substantial legal experience (admitted 1996)
- Indifference to making restitution
Mitigating (2 factors):
- Personal and emotional difficulties (mental health condition, divorce, family deaths, pandemic financial hardship)
- Demonstrated remorse at hearing
Holding
The Court unanimously ordered Singleton’s name removed from the rolls of persons authorized to practice law in Georgia, citing analogous disbarment decisions in In re Raines, In re Holliday, and In re McGowan. The aggravating factors — particularly the conversion of a minor’s settlement funds and the pattern of client abandonment — decisively outweighed the mitigating circumstances.
Comments: The first two matters listed above were cases of negligence. Normally, those types of claims are dealt with in the legal malpractice context. The injured client would sue and the lawyer’s insurer would defend and/or settle the case. The third matter (missing funds from the estate of a minor) is much more serious. As the Georgia Supreme Court notes: ” Based on Singleton’s default, the Special Master determined that Singleton violated Rules 1.15(I)(a) by failing to safeguard and account for the minor’s settlement funds in his possession; 3.5(d) by disregarding the probate court’s orders to release the settlement funds to the conservator, unnecessarily expending court resources by requiring the court to issue multiple orders and hold multiple hearings; and Rule 8.4(a)(4) by mishandling the minor’s settlement funds and converting the funds for personal use.”
Additionally, Singleton defaulted in the disciplinary process by failing to timely respond to some of the allegations.