In re Egan

• Decision Date: 22 March 1917
• Docket Number: 3819.
• Citation: 161 N.W. 1003,38 S.D. 458
• Parties: In re EGAN.
• Court: South Dakota Supreme Court

161 N.W. 1003

38 S.D. 458

In re EGAN.

No. 3819.

Supreme Court of South Dakota

March 22, 1917

In the matter of the application for the reinstatement of George W Egan as an attorney at law, disbarred as such, the proceedings being reported in 37 S.D. 159, 157 N.W. 310. Application denied.

See also, 159 N.W. 393, 160 N.W. 814.

George W. Egan, of Sioux Falls, per se.

McCOY J.

On the 26th of January, 1917, the petitioner, George W. Egan, caused to be filed a motion asking the court to make and enter its order canceling and vacating the order and judgment of disbarment, canceling his license to practice law within the state of South Dakota, entered on the 4th day of April, 1916. On January 27, 1917, the court entered its order denying said motion reciting that no showing had been made that applicant is a fit and proper person to be admitted to practice law in this state. Petitioner again on the 10th day of March, 1917 filed another motion and petition asking this court to enter its order canceling and vacating the said judgment of disbarment entered on the 4th day of April, 1916, and that the petitioner be restored to all his rights and privileges as an attorney and counselor at law, "with the same force and effect as if said order had never been entered, for the reason that the petitioner has been severely punished and suffered great pecuniary loss because of said order, and because the ends of justice will be subserved by its vacation." Along with his petition for reinstatement the petitioner filed two certificates, the first of which was signed by 52 members of the Minehaha county bar, reciting:

"That we are advised and understand that George W. Egan is desirous of making his permanent residence in the city of Chicago, with the view of practicing law in the state of Illinois; that we are well and intimately acquainted with said George W. Egan, and have observed his life and conduct since April 4, 1916, and said Egan is now, in our judgment, a fit and proper person to practice law, possessing all the qualifications required by our statute."

The second certificate was signed by about 250 persons consisting of county and city officials, business men, and corporations of Minnehaha county, and which certificate recited:

"That we are well and intimately acquainted with George W. Egan, who we are advised is desirous of making his permanent residence in the city of Chicago, with a view of practicing law in the state of Illinois; that from our acquaintance and knowledge of the attainments, life character, and ability of said George W. Egan, we believe him to be a fit person to practice law, and would be pleased to see him reinstated to all the rights of a lawyer and counselor at law."

No other showing of any kind or character has been made in connection with this petition for reinstatement. We quote from page 1332, vol. 2, Thornton on Attorneys at Law, the latest authority and exposition of the law upon that subject, as follows:

"It is generally held that a court which has power to disbar an attorney has power to reinstate him on good cause shown, and in a number of instances courts have exercised this power. On a disbarred attorney's application for reinstatement, the character of the misconduct for which he was disbarred, the circumstances attending his offense, his previous and subsequent conduct, and his present attitude toward the court, are important considerations; but the ultimate and decisive question is whether the applicant is of good moral character and is a fit and proper person to be intrusted with the privileges of the office of an attorney; in brief, whether the granting of his application would probably promote the administration of justice. This question has a broader significance than its purely personal aspect, and to persuade the court to reinstate an attorney, it must appear that his reinstatement will not be incompatible with the proper respect of the court for itself, and a proper regard for the dignity of the profession. A disbarred attorney seeking reinstatement must, like a candidate for admission to the bar, satisfy the court that he is a person of good moral character, and he has this burden whether or not opposition is made to his application. The mere formal of good character required upon an ordinary application of admission to the bar is not sufficient. The proof must be persuasive enough to overcome the court's former adverse judgment on the applicant's character."

The records of this court show that on the 10th day of October, 1908, the said George W. Egan was disbarred from practice of the law by the order and judgment of this court upon the charge of having fraudulently procured a client, Julia Ann O'Grady, to convey to him property the value of which was in the neighborhood of $10,000, and in rendering decision this court, speaking through the late Justice Corson, said:

"The conduct of the accused in this case *** shows that his perception of the duties and responsibilities of an attorney are such as to render him an undesirable associate of the members of a highly honorable profession, and dangerous for clients who may seek his assistance as an attorney. While we cannot overlook the fact that striking the name of the accused from the roll and revoking his license may result in serious consequences to himself and family, we cannot be unmindful of the duty we owe to ourselves, the courts of the state, the members of the bar, and the community in general. Such conduct as has been shown in this case reflects, not only upon the attorney himself, but seriously reflects upon the court and the members of the bar. All of the considerations that could be advanced in favor of the accused were ably presented by eminent counsel, but we have failed to discover any extenuating circumstances attending this remarkable transaction. To permit the accused to longer remain an officer of the court and entitled to the privileges accorded to an attorney would be to lower the standard of professional conduct, and encourage the younger members of the bar to pursue a course that cannot be recognized by this court. It has been the aim of this court to elevate the character both morally and intellectually of the members of the bar, and to retain the accused longer as a member of the bar would be doing an injustice to ourselves, to the profession, and to the community. Unpleasant, therefore, as is the duty, we must perform it, and strike from the roll of this court the name of the accused, and cancel the license heretofore issued to him." 22 S.D. 355, 117 N.W. 874.

On the 3d day of November, 1908, George W. Egan was elected state's attorney for Minnehaha county. Immediately thereafter one George J. Danforth, also a candidate for said office, contested the said election of Egan on the ground that Egan, having been disbarred, was not qualified to hold said office. The contest action was tried before Hon. Joseph W. Jones, judge of the circuit court, and a decision rendered adverse to Egan. Egan thereafter appealed from the decision of the circuit court to this court, and on the 10th day of February, 1909, the decision of the circuit court was affirmed, Justice Whiting, present senior member of this court, writing the opinion. Immediately after the adverse decisions against him in the contest action, Mr. Egan, the accused, indulged in villainous abuse of the judges of the court who participated in such decisions, in the editorial columns of a newspaper of which Egan was then the proprietor and publisher. On June 22, 1909, there having in the meantime been an addition to the personnel of this court of two members, Mr. Egan filed a petition to be reinstated and to be admitted to practice law. On December 1, 1909, the said application was denied in an opinion of the court speaking through Justice Whiting. 24 S.D. 301, 123 N.W. 478. In the record of the last-mentioned proceeding will be found many excerpts from editorials and reference to cartoons contained in said newspaper published by Mr. Egan in which he referred to the late Justice Corson and Justice Haney as "political tools" and "corrupt judges." In December, 1910, he again moved the court for the vacation or modification of the judgment of disbarment then existing against him; his petition therefor, among other things, reciting:

"That he has no means for procuring a livelihood; that he is now aware that he has not by his conduct toward the judiciary of this state at all times recognized his duty as a member of the profession; that he has been hasty, inconsiderate, and unfair he admits; nor does he undertake to excuse himself or justify his shortcomings by resort to recrimination against any tribunal or individual; that he was blinded as to his plain duty to uphold the courts of this state he can now see; that for all he has done and all he has said and all he has printed which might be construed as reflecting upon this court or any individual member of it he apologizes, and in so doing he knows that he honors himself; that in the use of the term 'apologizes' he means it in the broadest sense; that he intends thereby to and does retract each and every statement and charge that he has made derogatory to the court, individually and collectively, whether the same was such as to imply partiality, bias, corruption, incompetency, or to hold any member thereof, or the court as a whole, up to ridicule or

...