The Georgia Court of Appeals affirmed the prior win by  Joe Kingma, Shannon Sprinkle, and Megan McCue who had secured summary judgment in DeKalb County for their clients, a local defense law firm and its former partner.  The Plaintiff, the law firm’s former client, sued the lawyer and firm for malpractice and breach of fiduciary seeking to recover for a $3.2 million dollar excess judgment awarded against the Plaintiff in an underlying personal injury trial.  The defendant lawyers did not try the case and had been substituted out months before trial. The Plaintiff contended that the defendant lawyers failed to proactively settle four competing claims, which had been asserted against the Plaintiff arising out of a multi-vehicle truck accident.  The Plaintiff had a single $1,000,000 insurance policy and faced two competing demands for the full policy limits.  The DeKalb Judge correctly found that the Plaintiff’s case failed as a matter of law, because the acts of the competing litigants and subsequent counsel constituted intervening acts that broke the chain of proximate causation.  The Court of Appeals affirmed the trial court's decision in an unpublished opinion.

For informational purposes only. Past success does not indicate the likelihood of success in future cases.

Shannon Sprinkle and Tyler Wetzel prevailed for the second time at the Georgia Supreme Court on behalf of its out-of-state law firm client. In a related 2015 case, Shannon and Ty had secured a reversal of a trial court injunction of prior advertisements. This second lawsuit contended that the law firm had infringed upon the trademarks of a national nursing home facility group. The Plaintiff sought relief under Georgia’s trademark anti-dilution statute. The trial court entered a permanent injunction prohibiting the law firm from placing any advertisements which used the nursing home’s service marks, trade names, logos, or photographs of such. Shannon and Ty appealed the injunction to the Georgia Supreme Court, assisted by co-counsel specializing in trademark law. The Georgia Supreme Court reversed the trial court’s order finding that the law firm’s advertisements did not infringe upon the nursing home facilities’ trademarks. Justice Nahmias authored the opinion holding that "[not] every unwelcome use of one's trademark in the advertising of another provides a basis for a tarnishment claim." He said the law firm was using the nursing home logo in a descriptive manner and "counting on the public to identify" the facility. Nahmias added, "In short, the ad very clearly was an ad for a law firm and nothing more." A link to the Daily Report’s coverage of the Supreme Court’s ruling is below. The Supreme Court’s holding is a victory for law firms that rely upon legal advertisements. Although legal advertising is clearly permitted under the Georgia Rules of Professional Conduct, this case and the earlier 2015 case show that such advertisements may continue to be challenged on other legal grounds and remain hotly contested. Please click here for more information.

For informational purposes only. Past success does not indicate the likelihood of success in future cases.

Shannon Sprinkle, Jennifer Guerra and Megan McCue prevailed in federal court against a Plaintiff suing several lawyers, doctors, and state agencies for alleged errors and wrongs committed in her pursuit of an underlying worker’s compensation claim. Carlock Copeland filed an early Motion to Dismiss, however the District Court allowed Plaintiff to amend her Complaint. Carlock Copeland ultimately renewed its Motion to Dismiss, which the District Court granted.

For informational purposes only. Past success does not indicate the likelihood of success in future cases.

Shannon Sprinkle and Jennifer Guerra secured a dismissal of employment claims alleged against a national healthcare group that manages and operates long-term care facilities. A former employee sued the company alleging violations of the FMLA and other federal employment claims. Shannon and Jennifer vigorously defended those claims and Plaintiff refused to participate in discovery. On Carlock Copeland’s motion, the Court dismissed Plaintiff’s action with prejudice.

For informational purposes only. Past success does not indicate the likelihood of success in future cases.

Shannon Sprinkle and Matt Gass secured a dismissal for their law firm client in Fulton Superior Court on April 12, 2016.  The Plaintiff had filed a Complaint alleging wrongful foreclosure activities and RICO claims.  Shannon and Matt moved to dismiss the claim after Plaintiff and his attorney failed to participate in discovery efforts, which would have demonstrated the law firm had no liability.  The Fulton County Superior Court Judge agreed that dismissal was a proper sanction and dismissed the case with prejudice.

For informational purposes only. Past success does not indicate the likelihood of success in future cases.

On October 5, Shannon Sprinkle upheld the dismissal of two law firms and their lawyers on appeal to the Eleventh Circuit.  In this case, Plaintiff had embarked on a multi-year, multi-forum vendetta against various people and entities involved in a failed real estate prospect.  The Eleventh Circuit affirmed the dismissal of Plaintiff’s claims for fraud, conspiracy, negligence, breach of contract and breach of duty.

For informational purposes only. Past success does not indicate the likelihood of success in future cases.

On September 4, 2015, Shannon Sprinkle prevailed in the Eleventh Circuit, securing an Affirmance of the Northern District’s dismissal of her lawyer client.  Shannon’s client had been dismissed by the trial court, holding that the Rooker-Feldman Doctrine barred Plaintiff’s claims.  The Eleventh Circuit affirmed the dismissal fully.

For informational purposes only. Past success does not indicate the likelihood of success in future cases.

Shannon Sprinkle and Ty Wetzel successfully defended two lawyers against a bar grievance that had been referred to the Investigative Panel.  Shannon and Ty prepared written responses to several submissions made by the complainant and provided extensive evidence illustrating that no bar rules had been violated.  The Panel ultimately found no probable cause and dismissed the grievance.

For informational purposes only. Past success does not indicate the likelihood of success in future cases.

Shannon Sprinkle and Tyler Wetzel recently convinced the Georgia Supreme Court to vacate a trial court order permanently enjoining CCS’s law firm client from placing certain advertisements. The matter arose early last year after the law firm ran a newspaper advertisement soliciting clients for nursing home neglect cases. The day after the advertisements ran, the nursing home obtained an ex parte temporary restraining order from the trial court and sought both preliminary and permanent injunctive relief aimed at curtailing the law firm’s advertising. At a hearing occurring only a few weeks later, the trial court entered a permanent injunction against the law firm. On appeal, Shannon and Tyler argued the trial court committed numerous procedural errors in reaching its ruling and, after oral argument, the Georgia Supreme Court unanimously agreed. The Supreme Court held the trial court erred by consolidating the hearing on the preliminary injunction with the trial on the merits because it failed to provide the parties with sufficient notice of its intent to do so. The Supreme Court also ruled in favor of the law firm on a novel issue raised in a subsequent appeal of the same case and held the trial court erred by excluding certain documents from the appellate record. The case has been remanded to the trial court for further proceedings. Please contact Shannon or Tyler if you have questions about actions for injunctive relief, legal advertising, or issues relating to the record on appeal.

For informational purposes only. Past success does not indicate the likelihood of success in future cases.

John Bunyan and Shannon Sprinkle won affirmance of the dismissal of a renewal action against a guardian ad litem filed by the parent of children she represented in a proceeding to modify visitation rights. John and Shannon previously obtained a dismissal of federal claims brought by the Plaintiff and successfully defended that dismissal on appeal to the Eleventh Circuit. After the plaintiff refiled claims for defamation and intentional infliction of emotional distress that the federal court declined to consider, the trial court granted John and Shannon’s motion to dismiss the plaintiff’s claims because he failed to timely refile them under Georgia’s renewal statute. The Court of Appeals affirmed the dismissal, agreeing with CCS’s argument that the renewal clock started to run when the Eleventh Circuit affirmed the dismissal of the plaintiff’s previous lawsuit, not when it entered its mandate.  Thus, Plaintiff had filed his renewal action four days too late under Georgia’s renewal statute. The Court of Appeals also agreed with John and Shannon’s argument that the federal supplemental jurisdiction statute did not give the plaintiff more time to refile his claims than Georgia’s renewal statute.

For informational purposes only. Past success does not indicate the likelihood of success in future cases.

Shannon Sprinkle, and Joe Kingma prevailed on a motion for summary judgment in favor of a local real estate lawyer. Carlock Copeland successfully argued that the Plaintiff, who was attempting to stand in the shoes of an original lender, was not a successor in interest and was not entitled to bring the malpractice claims asserted. Plaintiff, a distressed debt buyer, had purchased loans from a failing bank with a book value of more than $20M. As to one of the defaulted loans, Plaintiff alleged malpractice against the closing lawyer because certain title exceptions were not included as exceptions to a title insurance policy and allegedly not disclosed to the lending bank. Carlock Copeland succeeded in getting the case dismissed by demonstrating that Plaintiff lacked standing, because although it had purchased the rights to the loans, there was no written assignment of any malpractice claims. This case may be appealed so watch for further updates.

For informational purposes only. Past success does not indicate the likelihood of success in future cases.

Shannon Sprinkle prevailed on summary judgment for her lawyer client defeating Plaintiff’s claims that a case had been settled without her authority. The lawyer had pursued worker’s compensation and personal injury claims on behalf of a client who was injured in an automobile accident during the course of her employment.  Plaintiff alleged that the lawyer had conflicts of interest, which negatively impacted the pursuit and resolution of her claims.  The lawyer settled the Plaintiff’s case for policy limits, and although phone records reflected numerous discussions with the client the day the case was settled, the Plaintiff later claimed that she did not authorize the settlement.  In the lawsuit, Plaintiff contended the case against the at-fault driver should have been pursued further to secure a larger settlement or verdict. On Carlock Copeland’s motion, the Judge dismissed Plaintiff’s claims of Legal Malpractice, Breach of Fiduciary Duty, Breach of Contract, and Fraud, finding that the claims could not succeed as Plaintiff had not demonstrated any damages proximately caused by the lawyer’s alleged  misconduct. The case may be appealed so watch for further updates.

For informational purposes only. Past success does not indicate the likelihood of success in future cases.

Shannon Sprinkle and Tyler Wetzel secured a dismissal for a local real estate law firm faced with a legal malpractice complaint filed by an assignee of a title insurance company. The title insurance company had paid a claim as a result of an alleged ly improperly filed security deed. The title company assigned its claims to a third party who then filed suit against the law firm. Shannon and Ty successfully moved to open default and moved to dismiss the complaint. A Fulton State Judge granted the motion to open default and then granted the motion to dismiss agreeing that the complaint violated the recently enacted prohibition on the assignment of legal malpractice claims. The case may be appealed so watch for future updates.

For informational purposes only. Past success does not indicate the likelihood of success in future cases.

Shannon M. Sprinkle secured dismissal of her lawyer-client from a lawsuit filed by a plaintiff who claimed the lawyer had misused attorney-client privilege, abused court process, and committed other wrongs in the representation of Plaintiff’s ex-wife. The Court dismissed the case finding that the Plaintiff’s claims against the lawyer and his law firm could not succeed.

For informational purposes only. Past success does not indicate the likelihood of success in future cases.

Shannon Sprinkle and Joe Kingma won the dismissal of a federal action against a law firm that was retained to initiate foreclosure proceedings. The plaintiff alleged that his promissory note and security deed were forged and that the collections law firm "robo-signed" the assignment of his security deed and failed to get government authorization before foreclosing. In dismissing the action, the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Georgia concluded that none of these allegations stated a plausible claim for relief.

For informational purposes only. Past success does not indicate the likelihood of success in future cases.

Shannon M. Sprinkle secured the dismissal of a federal lawsuit against their client, a private non-profit home for children in state custody. The plaintiff asserted multiple counts against the non-profit, but the Southern District of Georgia agreed with CCS’s argument that the plaintiff failed to state a plausible claim for relief.

For informational purposes only. Past success does not indicate the likelihood of success in future cases.

Shannon Sprinkle and Joe Kingma won Summary Judgment on February 16, 2011, for a well-known law firm. The Law Firm had acted as escrow agent for a consortium of developers who built a network of sewer pump stations. The final cost exceeded the Seven Million Dollar budget and the primary contractor for the project demanded an additional $1.5M from the developers for allegedly completed but unpaid work. As the escrowed funds were insufficient to meet the new demands, the Law Firm filed an Interpleader action seeking to deposit the remaining escrow sums into court. One of the developers, against whom the additional demands for payment from the contractor was made, filed a counterclaim against the Law Firm alleging that it had mishandled the escrow account, resulting in undisclosed damages. Carlock Copeland aggressively defended the counterclaim demonstrating through the depositions of representatives for the counterclaimant developer that it had suffered no damages other than approximately $70,000 it had paid its lawyers to pursue meritless claims. The Court also found that the developer could not show that the Law Firm had done anything improper in its administration of the escrow account to cause any damages. Carlock Copeland's Motion for Summary Judgment was successful and the developer's claims were dismissed.

For informational purposes only. Past success does not indicate the likelihood of success in future cases.

Shannon Sprinkle won summary judgment in federal court after the plaintiff sued in retaliation to a state-court collection action. The plaintiff alleged the law firm unlawfully sought to collect a debt after the bank filed a cancellation of the security deed. The plaintiff had attempted to satisfy the debt using an intricate payment scheme which he claimed the bank improperly processed. The District Court found the collection suit did not violate the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act because the plaintiff’s payment scheme failed and the release of the security deed was not supported by consideration.

For informational purposes only. Past success does not indicate the likelihood of success in future cases.

Shannon Sprinkle and Joe Kingma won the dismissal of a federal action against a law firm that handles collections matters throughout the Southeast. The Plaintiff alleged claims based on the law firm's initiating foreclosure proceedings against her. In dismissing the case, the Northern District of Georgia determined that the law firm was not engaged in "debt collection" under the Fair Debt Collections Practices Act because it was enforcing its client's valid security interest in the Plaintiff's property. The district court further concluded that the assignment of the Plaintiff's loan and security deed was validly made retroactive under Georgia law. In addition to the FDCPA claims, the district court also dismissed the Plaintiff's state law fraud and civil RICO claims.

For informational purposes only. Past success does not indicate the likelihood of success in future cases.

On November 17, 2010, Shannon Sprinkle and Joe Kingma defeated claims by a recently divorced husband against a lawyer who at one time had represented both husband and wife. The husband claimed that the lawyer, while representing both the husband and the wife, drafted a divorce agreement which was adopted and made a part of the divorce decree. He claimed that there was a "side deal" to give parcels of land back to him after the divorce was final. The trial judge based his grant of summary judgment on the terms of the executed settlement agreement and his unwillingness to collaterally attack the divorce decree which had not been vacated. Additionally, the judge ruled that the husband's assertions amounted to a confession of an attempt to defraud his creditors. "The principal that a plaintiff who has participated in wrongdoing may not recover damages resulting from the wrongdoing," in pari delicto, is a common defense in accounting malpractice cases, but is seldom seen in attorney malpractice cases. This result was appealed and upheld.

For informational purposes only. Past success does not indicate the likelihood of success in future cases.

Shannon Sprinkle and Joe Kingma achieved summary judgment for a City Attorney faced with allegations of malicious prosecution filed in Federal Court. The Mayor had been indicted on two counts of violating his oath of office after engaging in questionable transactions involving City funds and endangering a community development grant due to conflicts of interest. After that indictment was dismissed based on the technical invalidity of a City Ethics Ordinance, the Mayor sued the City Attorney, City Manager, and former and current City Council members. Carlock Copeland filed a Motion for Summary Judgment, which the Federal Judge granted on August 27, 2010. The Court found that there was no evidence that the defendant instigated the prosecution or that he knew that a city ordinance had not been properly passed.

For informational purposes only. Past success does not indicate the likelihood of success in future cases.

Shannon Sprinkle and Joe Kingma won Summary Judgment for an Atlanta lawyer accused of malpractice, breach of fiduciary duty, and fraud. The Plaintiff backed a multi-million dollar mixed-use development in Cartersville and sued after the project failed and he was called upon to satisfy his guaranty. In addition to his payment on the guaranty, the Plaintiff sought damages for lost investment opportunities, diminished credit rating, and more than $300,000 in attorney's fees. He claimed that the lawyer representing the borrower labored under conflicts of interest, owed him a duty, and gave bad advice. He bolstered his claim with the testimony of the author of a six volume Legal Malpractice Treatise, an Emory law professor, and one of the deans of the banking bar in Atlanta. Nonetheless, the Defendants’ Motion for Summary Judgment was granted. The case was appealed, but the appeal was dismissed and summary judgment stood.

For informational purposes only. Past success does not indicate the likelihood of success in future cases.

Shannon M. Sprinkle won at the Court of Appeals for their client, a Special Assistant Attorney General. The plaintiff had successfully overturned a prior judgment against him, and then brought claims for false arrest and false imprisonment against the Assistant Attorney General. Shannon won a dismissal in Dekalb Superior Court, which the Court of Appeals affirmed.

For informational purposes only. Past success does not indicate the likelihood of success in future cases.

Shannon Sprinkle and Joe Kingma obtained dismissal of an accounting malpractice suit in the Superior Court of Bartow County on May 10, 2007. They represented an Alabama accounting firm that had performed attest services for a business that failed. The business and some of its principals claimed the accountants were responsible. After Shannon and Joe filed the motion to dismiss, the principals declared bankruptcy. After the dust settled and the bankruptcy concluded, the court dismissed claims against the accountants.

For informational purposes only. Past success does not indicate the likelihood of success in future cases.

Shannon Sprinkle and Joe Kingma defended a national law firm against malpractice claims filed by a client dissatisfied with their result at trial. Finding that the plaintiff's claims were unwarranted, the trial court granted summary judgment to the firm and to the individual partners named in the lawsuit. The Court of Appeals of Georgia affirmed.

For informational purposes only. Past success does not indicate the likelihood of success in future cases.

Shannon Sprinkle and Joe Kingma represented an Atlanta-based real estate investment company. The adjacent owner's building encroached upon our clients' property. After negotiations failed, we filed suit. Shortly thereafter, we reached an agreement with the adjacent owner to demolish the offending structure, and our client recouped damages and attorney's fees. Indigo Holdings, Inc. v. Greenclub Investment Corp., Fulton Superior Court, 2006-CV-114826.

For informational purposes only. Past success does not indicate the likelihood of success in future cases.

John Bunyan and Shannon Sprinkle won dismissal of a complaint against a guardian ad litem filed by the parent of children she represented in a proceeding to modify visitation rights. John and Shannon had previously defended the case in federal court, garnering a dismissal of federal claims and holding the dismissal on appeal to the Eleventh Circuit. Plaintiff re-filed defamation and intentional infliction of emotional distress claims in state court after the federal court declined to exercise jurisdiction. John and Shannon successfully demonstrated that the plaintiff failed to timely re-file the claims under Georgia’s renewal statute and could not allege new claims against the guardian ad litem in the renewal action.

For informational purposes only. Past success does not indicate the likelihood of success in future cases.

Shannon Sprinklesuccessfully obtained a dismissal in federal court ending litigation that had been fought in multiple forums against multiple parties for more than a decade. Plaintiff’s property was sold in a tax sale. Claims were filed challenging the tax sale, and during the course of the litigation, Plaintiff filed for bankruptcy. Litigation over the property and purported bankruptcy stay violations resulted in appeals that ultimately were heard by the Georgia Supreme Court. While the state court action was on appeal, Plaintiff filed an action in federal court under the All Writs Act to enjoin the Georgia Supreme Court from hearing the appeal. That request was denied. The Georgia Supreme Court then considered the appeal, and as part of its ruling, found that there had been no violation of the automatic stay imposed by Plaintiff’s bankruptcy proceeding. The District Court found that the Georgia Supreme Court’s holding that there was no violation of the automatic stay was binding, and it had no jurisdiction to hear the matter. The District Court held that the Georgia Supreme Court had concurrent subject matter jurisdiction over the questions relating to violation of the automatic stay, and thus, it would not review the Supreme Court’s decision finding the stay had not been violated. The federal court therefore dismissed Plaintiff’s action for lack of subject matter jurisdiction.

For informational purposes only. Past success does not indicate the likelihood of success in future cases.

Shannon Sprinkle and Joe Kingma obtained denial of a petition for writ of certiorari from the Supreme Court after the Court of Appeals had affirmed the grant of summary judgment granted in favor of their lawyer client. Their client had been sued by an opposing party in a divorce case for claims of breach of fiduciary duty, fraud, and conspiracy. Plaintiff's claims were an effort to un-do the divorce decree, which he said resulted in an unfair distribution of marital assets. The trial court had previously rejected all of Plaintiff’s claims against the lawyer as an improper collateral attack on the prior judgment and found that Plaintiff was barred by in pari delicto due to his own bad acts. The Court of Appeals affirmed the trial court’s decision, agreeing that the Plaintiff's claims were an improper collateral attack on the prior judgment. The Supreme Court's denial of the Plaintiff's petition for writ of certiorari marks the end of the Plaintiff's appeals and brings this case to a close in the client's favor.

For informational purposes only. Past success does not indicate the likelihood of success in future cases.

On June 16, 2011, the Eleventh Circuit affirmed the dismissal of a lawsuit brought against a lawyer/guardian ad litem. Shannon Sprinkle and Joe Kingma successfully argued that the plaintiff had not sufficiently alleged facts supporting the claim that the guardian had conspired with state actors and others to deprive the plaintiff of his constitutional rights.

For informational purposes only. Past success does not indicate the likelihood of success in future cases.

John Bunyan and Shannon Sprinkle won dismissal of an action against a law firm retained to initiate foreclosure proceedings. Granting Carlock Copeland's motion to dismiss, the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Georgia concluded that the Plaintiff's negligence claim failed because the law firm did not owe him any duty of care in the foreclosure proceedings. The district court also rejected Plaintiff's “robo-signing” challenge to the assignment of his security deed executed by the law firm, finding that he lacked standing to challenge the assignment.

For informational purposes only. Past success does not indicate the likelihood of success in future cases.

John Bunyan and Shannon Sprinkle won dismissal of a wrongful foreclosure action against a law firm retained to initiate foreclosure and dispossessory proceedings. Plaintiff challenged foreclosure proceedings against three properties that he alleged had been transferred to him after the original borrowers had signed promissory notes and security deeds. The district court dismissed Plaintiff’s claims because he lacked standing to challenge foreclosure proceedings brought under security deeds that he was not a party to, he had not alleged that the loans in default had been satisfied, and his own personal bankruptcy did not operate as a stay of foreclosure proceedings based on the original borrowers’ default on their loans.

For informational purposes only. Past success does not indicate the likelihood of success in future cases.

John Bunyan and Shannon Sprinkle won dismissal of federal claims against a law firm retained to initiate foreclosure proceedings. Plaintiff alleged that the law firm violated the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act by pursuing foreclosure proceedings after she requested verification of her debt. Granting Carlock Copeland's motion to dismiss, the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Georgia held that Plaintiff’s Complaint was insufficient to show that the firm met the statutory definition of a "debt collector."

For informational purposes only. Past success does not indicate the likelihood of success in future cases.

Shannon Sprinkle obtained summary judgment for a well- respected Atlanta law firm after a Plaintiff had sued the firm for mistakenly confusing her and her daughter who had the same name. The Plaintiff alleged that she had been harassed and tormented in efforts to collect HOA fees owed by Plaintiff’s daughter. Plaintiff and her daughter shared the same first and last name and middle initial. Collection notices were sent to the Plaintiff at her home in Tennessee and she claimed the harassment and stress caused significant health and financial problems. The name confusion was later remedied and Plaintiff was dismissed from any further collection activities; nevertheless, Plaintiff pursued an action against the firm for bad faith and abusive litigation, negligent misrepresentation, unjust enrichment, and alleged FDCPA violations. Carlock Copeland pursued discovery and demonstrated that Plaintiff had a history of litigiousness and her claims were nothing more than a mistaken identity. It was shown that Plaintiff had not suffered the harm she claimed and the firm had not taken the abusive and harassing actions alleged in the Complaint. The law firm’s Motion for Summary Judgment was granted by the Fulton Superior Court. This case may be appealed, so watch for further updates.

For informational purposes only. Past success does not indicate the likelihood of success in future cases.

John Bunyan and Shannon Sprinkle won dismissal of a wrongful foreclosure action against a law firm retained to initiate foreclosure proceedings. Plaintiff argued that the foreclosure proceedings were wrongful because the bank had failed to produce a verified copy of the promissory note showing it was the creditor authorized to foreclose, had breached the notice terms of the security deed, and had misrepresented that the foreclosure sale would be postponed while the plaintiff negotiated a loan modification. The U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Georgia dismissed plaintiff’s claims, agreeing with Carlock Copeland’s arguments that the claims were barred by res judicata based on the dismissal of the plaintiff’s prior action challenging the foreclosure sale and otherwise failed to state any claim for relief.

For informational purposes only. Past success does not indicate the likelihood of success in future cases.

Shannon Sprinkle won the dismissal of false arrest and false imprisonment claims filed against a Special Assistant Attorney General representing Georgia's Department of Human Services. The Plaintiff alleged the attorney improperly instigated his arrest during a court hearing. The Plaintiff had prevailed in the Court of Appeals to overturn a prior judgment against him.

For informational purposes only. Past success does not indicate the likelihood of success in future cases.

John Bunyan and Shannon Sprinkle won summary judgment on behalf of their client, a well known litigation firm specializing in lender services. The firm had been accused of FDCPA violations. The District Court rejected Plaintiff’s claims that the law firm had proceeded with a foreclosure before its client had a proper security interest. The other claims in Plaintiff’s Complaint had been dismissed in an earlier motion filed by John and Shannon, and that ruling was upheld by the Eleventh Circuit. This case may be appealed again so watch for further updates.

For informational purposes only. Past success does not indicate the likelihood of success in future cases.

John Bunyan and Shannon Sprinkle successfully defended a well-respected local law firm against putative class action claims. Following John and Shannon's successful dismissal of many of Plaintiff's original claims, the Plaintiff sought class certification for remaining FDCPA claims. The District Court dismissed the putative class claims agreeing with the Defendants that they had not been timely pursued.

For informational purposes only. Past success does not indicate the likelihood of success in future cases.

Shannon Sprinkle and John Bunyan won the dismissal of a federal action against a law firm that was retained to initiate foreclosure and dispossessory claims. In dismissing the case, the Northern District of Georgia concluded that the plaintiff's allegations of Fair Debt Collection Practices Act violations and wrongful foreclosure failed to show any plausible claim for relief.

For informational purposes only. Past success does not indicate the likelihood of success in future cases.

John Bunyan and Shannon Sprinkle obtained Judgment on the Pleadings in Federal Court for their lawyer-client, a well respected Guardian Ad Litem.In a case of first impression, the Northern District of Georgia found that the Guardian Ad Litem was not subject to Plaintiff's claims for alleged violations of his constitutional rights, holding that the Guardian was not a state actor.

For informational purposes only. Past success does not indicate the likelihood of success in future cases.

Joe Kingma and the CCS Accounting Malpractice Team hosted our annual Risk Management for Audit and Accounting Firms program to auditors, CPAs and insurance industry professionals on May 10, 2018.  This program was offered live at Ponce City Market and live-streamed for those unable to be in attendance in-person.  Carlock, Copeland & Stair is a NASBA approved CPE sponsor. Please contact Michelle Mattox at mmattox@carlockcopeland.com for more information on this annual program.

Shannon Sprinkle participated in a panel discussion regarding Attorney Ethics and Professionalism at the 39th Annual National Association of Women Judges Conference on October 14, 2017 in Atlanta, Georgia.

Shannon Sprinkle presented Ethical Considerations for Transactional Lawyers at the 36th Annual Business Law Institute held at the Westin Buckhead on October 13.

Carlock, Copeland & Stair, LLP held a Risk Management for Audit and Accounting Firms Seminar on August 11, 2017 in Brentwood, TN. The seminar was a success and  designed to help CPAs and accountants deal proactively and efficiently with audit and accounting industry related risk. Program information is listed below.  If you were unable to attend, but interested in this presentation or other presentations and webinars tailored to your business; please contact Michelle Mattox at mmattox@carlockcopeland.com. Shannon Sprinkle, Firm Managing Partner, Carlock, Copeland & Stair presented Cyber Liability Concerns for the Accounting Professional and Protecting Against Cyber Liability. Joe Kingma, Partner and Commercial Litigation Practice Group Leader, Carlock, Copeland & Stair presented Engagement Letters/Contracts. Joe Kingma moderated a panel presentation on Red Flag Clients with panelists Sarah Ference, CPA, Risk Control Director, CNA - Professional Services and J. Dale Crow, Corporate Counsel, Risk Strategies Company. All speakers participated in a segment on War Stories, Bad Cases and Good Outcomes. Brian Spitler, Partner, Carlock, Copeland & Stair  presented a segment on Subpoenas. Carlock, Copeland & Stair LLP is an approved provider with the National Association of State Boards of Accountancy (NASBA) as a sponsor of continuing professional education on the National Registry of CPE Sponsors.  State boards of accountancy have final authority on acceptance of individual courses for CPE credit.  More information available at www.nasbaregistry.org.

Joe Kingma and the Commercial Litigation Team present in house programs on Risk Management for Audit and Accounting Firms to accountants, CPAs and insurance industry professionals throughout the year. The Commercial Litigation Team also presents annual client programs on Risk Management for Audit and Accounting Firms. Our 2017 Atlanta program was held at the Buckhead Club on June 8 as well as live-streamed to a remote audience. Please click on the short video clips below from the June 8th event by Shannon Sprinkle, Tyler Wetzel, Doug MacKelcan, Joe Kingma, John Rogers and Mark Rogers.

Shannon Sprinkle presented Why Real Estate Attorneys Get Sued and How to Avoid It at the Real Property Law Institute Conference being held May 4-6 at the Hilton Sandestin Beach Golf Resort & Spa, 4000 Sandestin Blvd S, Miramar Beach, FL 32550. Shannon’s presentation was a joint session held on Saturday, May 6 at 11:45 a.m. 12 CLE Hours including 1 Ethics Hour, 1 Professionalism Hour, and 3 Trial Practice Hours Co-Sponsor: Real Property Law Section, State Bar of Georgia Please click here for more information on this program. Please click here for registration information.  

Shannon Sprinkle and Joe Kingma participated in the ICLE Not Your Typical CLE: What We Have Here is a Failure to Communicate (Seminar Number 9495) on March 30, 2017. Early Registration is $155 and On-Site Registration is $185. Shannon Sprinkle presented Cross Examination (Plaintiff's Cross Examination of Defendant Lawyer Section). Joe Kingma presented Direct Examination by Plaintiff (Examination of Expert Witness Section). The event was held at the State Bar of Georgia Conference Center in Atlanta and via Video Conference at the Coastal Georgia Office of the State Bar of Georgia in Savannah and via Video Conference at the South Georgia Office of the State Bar of Georgia in Tifton.  The program was also offered via Webstream.

Shannon Sprinkle participated in the Beginning Lawyers Program on February 27.  Shannon presented How To Avoid Bar Complaints & Malpractice at the State Bar of Georgia Conference Center in Atlanta and via videoconference at the State Bar of Georgia Coastal Georgia Office in Savannah and the State Bar of Georgia South Georgia Office in Tifton.

Shannon Sprinkle presented Ethical Considerations for Transactional Lawyers on October 28 at the 35th Annual Business Law Institute.  The two day Business Law program covered topics including Director’s & Officer’s Liability, Hot Issues for the General Counsel’s Office, E-signatures and Commercial Transaction Documentation, Insuring M&A Success, and many other relevant topics for commercial and business lawyers.

Shannon Sprinkle participate in the ICLE Title Standards Program presented at the State Bar of Georgia on Oct. 7. Shannon presented Title Standards and Lawyer Liability. This program was also available via videoconference and web stream.  

Shannon Sprinkle awarded "On The Rise" in The Daily Report list.

Joe Kingma and the Accounting Malpractice Defense Team presented Risk Management for Audit and Accounting Firms at The Buckhead Club on  May 19. Please contact Michelle Mattox at mmattox@carlockcopeland.com for information regarding this program.

Carlock, Copeland and Stair, LLP was proud to be a silver sponsor for the ABA Spring 2016 National Legal Malpractice Conference held on April 27-29 at the Roosevelt New Orleans Waldorf Astoria. Joe Kingma, Shannon Sprinkle, Doug MacKelcan and Brian Spitler attended.

Shannon Sprinkle and Jennifer Guerra attended the PLUS event entitled, From Prevention to Cure - The Life Cycle of a Cyber Liability Claim and the Role of Insurance in Tampa, Florida on March 10, 2016.

February 19, 2016 Carlock, Copeland & Stair, LLP is proud to announce our lawyers selected for inclusion on the Georgia Super Lawyers® and Rising Stars® lists for 2016. Thomas S. Carlock and Johannes S. Kingma have been selected for inclusion on the Top 100 Super Lawyers® in the State of Georgia. Only five percent of the lawyers in the state are named by Super Lawyers®. The selections for this esteemed list are made by the research team at Super Lawyers®, which is a service of Thomson Reuters. Each year, the research team at Super Lawyers® undertakes a rigorous multi-phase selection process that includes a statewide survey of lawyers, independent evaluation of candidates by the attorney-led research staff, a peer review of candidates by practice area, and a good-standing and disciplinary check. Top 100 for the State of Georgia - Super Lawyers® Thomas S. Carlock - Top Rated Civil Litigation Attorney in Atlanta, Georgia Johannes S. Kingma - Top Rated Professional Liability Attorney in Atlanta, Georgia Super Lawyers® Thomas S. Carlock - Civil Litigation: Defense Wade K. Copeland - Civil Litigation: Defense Eric J. Frisch - Personal Injury Medical Malpractice: Defense Johannes S. Kingma - Professional Liability: Defense D. Gary Lovell, Jr. - Personal Injury Medical Malpractice: Defense David F. Root - General Litigation Douglas W. Smith - Personal Injury General: Defense Kent T. Stair - Professional Liability: Defense Frederick M. Valz, III - Insurance Coverage Rising Stars® is a listing of exceptional lawyers who are 40 years of age or under, or who have been practicing for 10 years or less, and have attained a high degree of peer recognition and professional achievement. Only 2.5 percent of the total lawyers in the state are honored on the Rising Stars® list. Rising Stars® Shannon M. Sprinkle - Professional Liability: Defense Peter Werdesheim - Professional Liability - Defense

Carlock, Copeland & Stair Partner Shannon Sprinkle coordinated contributions from 21 members of the Firm to continue an annual tradition of gathering holiday gifts for children served by the Fulton County Division of Family and Children Services. The Division of Family and Children Services (DFCS) is the part of Georgia Department of Human Services (DHS) that investigates child abuse; finds foster homes for abused and neglected children; helps low income, out-of-work parents get back on their feet; assists with childcare costs for low income parents who are working or in job training; and provides numerous support services and innovative programs to help troubled families. For more information on Carlock, Copeland & Stair community events, please click here.

Shannon Sprinkle presented Professional Responsibility, Concerns and Related Judicial Trends as part of the Real Property Foreclosure seminar.  Charlie McDaniel presented Client Data Breaches: A First-Response Plan For Lawyers as part of the Real Property Foreclosure seminar.  The seminar took place on November 6, 2016 and was broadcasted via videoconference to multiple locations of the State Bar of Georgia. For more information, click here.

Shannon Sprinkle presented Title Standards and Lawyer Liability on Oct 2 as part of the Title Standards seminar. The seminar was broadcasted via videoconference to the Coastal Georgia Office (Savannah) and the South Georgia Office (Tifton) of the State Bar of Georgia. The program originated with an audience at the State Bar of Georgia Conference Center in Atlanta. Register at: http://www.iclega.org/programs/8976.html.  

Charlie McDaniel and Shannon Sprinkle will be presenting "Data Security and Privacy Liability - Advice. Response. Defense. Coverage" at the April 29, 2015 Daily Report sponsored Corporate Counsel CLE Seminar. This seminar is pending approval for CLE credit including one Ethics credit.

Location: Maggiano's Little Italy, 1601 Cumberland Mall, Atlanta, GA 30339 / Event Details/Registration

Joe Kingma and the Commercial Litigation Team present in house programs on Risk Management for Audit and Accounting Firms to accountants, CPAs and insurance industry professionals throughout the year. The Commercial Litigation Team also presents annual client programs on Risk Management for Audit and Accounting Firms. Our 2017 Atlanta program was held at the Buckhead Club on June 8 as well as live-streamed to a remote audience. Please click on the short video clips below from the June 8th event by Shannon Sprinkle, Tyler Wetzel, Doug MacKelcan, Joe Kingma, John Rogers and Mark Rogers.

Carlock, Copeland & Stair, LLP is proud to announce that several of our lawyers have been selected for inclusion on the Super Lawyers® and Rising Stars® lists for 2017. Super Lawyers® Thomas S. Carlock - Civil Litigation: Defense Wade K. Copeland - Civil Litigation: Defense Eric J. Frisch - Personal Injury Medical Malpractice: Defense Johannes S. Kingma - Professional Liability: Defense D. Gary Lovell, Jr. - Personal Injury Medical Malpractice: Defense David F. Root - General Litigation Douglas W. Smith - Personal Injury General: Defense Kent T. Stair - Professional Liability: Defense Fred M. Valz, III - Insurance Coverage Rising Stars® Shannon M. Sprinkle - Professional Liability: Defense

Shannon Sprinkle has been named Carlock, Copeland & Stair's Firm Managing Partner. David Root, Carlock Copeland's immediate past Managing Partner commented, "Shannon is one of many talented younger lawyers in our firm who are stepping up to provide leadership for us as we continue moving forward." Shannon previously served as General Counsel and Co-Chair of the Commercial Litigation Practice Group. In addition to firm leadership, Shannon will continue her practice as a Partner in the Commercial Litigation Practice Group. Commercial Litigation Practice Group Chair Joe Kingma noted "Shannon has excelled defending lawyers and accountants and also earned the trust of all our partners in her performance as General Counsel. Freeing Shannon from General Counsel and Practice Group responsibilities enables her to lead the firm and still continue to provide A+ service to her clients. We are all excited to have Shannon leading us towards the firm's sixth decade." Shannon's commercial litigation practice centers on professional malpractice, finance, real estate and business related claims. Shannon also frequently acts as outside general counsel to companies and professional service firms providing risk management advice and other consultations. Shannon was a 2016 honoree on The Daily Report's list of lawyers "On the Rise" and has been named on the Georgia Rising Stars list for many consecutive years. Executive Committee Members: Joe Kingma, Firm General Counsel and Chair of the Commercial Litigation Practice Group David Root, Chair of the Employment Practice Group Paul Sperry, Chair of the Construction Practice Group and Managing Partner of the Charleston Office Fred Valz, Chair of General Liability Practice Group Bill Jones, Partner in Design Professional Practice Group Brian Gedeon, Executive Director Other firm leadership roles announced include: Billy Newcomb, Risk Management Counsel and Assistant General Counsel Lynn Olmert, Co-Chair of the Workers' Compensation Practice Group About Carlock, Copeland and Stair, LLP Carlock, Copeland & Stair, LLP focuses on civil litigation and dispute resolution. Founded in 1970, the Firm has office locations in Atlanta, Georgia; Charleston, South Carolina; and Chattanooga, Tennessee. The Firm’s lawyers provide counsel and advice in the following practice areas: Appellate, Commercial Litigation, Construction Litigation, Employment Litigation, Environmental Litigation, General Liability Litigation, Health Care Litigation, Insurance Coverage & Bad Faith Litigation, Product Liability, Trucking & Transportation Litigation, and Workers’ Compensation. For additional information, please visit www.carlockcopeland.com.

Tom Carlock and Shannon Sprinkle received The Daily Report awards on June 23. Tom Carlock received the lifetime achievement award by The Daily Report.  Please click here to read the complete article. Shannon Sprinkle received the "On the Rise" award by The Daily Report.  Please click here to read the complete article.    

Carlock, Copeland and Stair, LLP will be a silver sponsor for the ABA Spring 2016 National Legal Malpractice Conference.  The conference will be held on April 27-29 at the Roosevelt New Orleans Waldorf Astoria. Joe Kingma, Shannon Sprinkle, Doug MacKelcan and Brian Spitler will be attending.  Click here for brochure.

February 19, 2016 Carlock, Copeland & Stair, LLP is proud to announce that 13 of our lawyers have been selected for inclusion on the Super Lawyers® and Rising Stars® lists for 2016. Only five percent of the lawyers in the state are named by Super Lawyers®. The selections for this esteemed list are made by the research team at Super Lawyers®, which is a service of Thomson Reuters. Each year, the research team at Super Lawyers® undertakes a rigorous multi-phase selection process that includes a statewide survey of lawyers, independent evaluation of Prcandidates by the attorney-led research staff, a peer review of candidates by practice area, and a good-standing and disciplinary check. Super Lawyers® Thomas S. Carlock - Civil Litigation: Defense Wade K. Copeland - Civil Litigation: Defense Eric J. Frisch - Personal Injury Medical Malpractice: Defense Johannes S. Kingma - Professional Liability: Defense D. Gary Lovell, Jr. - Personal Injury Medical Malpractice: Defense W. Dan McGrew, III - Professional Liability: Defense David F. Root - General Litigation Douglas W. Smith - Personal Injury General: Defense Kent T. Stair - Professional Liability: Defense Frederick M. Valz, III - Insurance Coverage Rising Stars® is a listing of exceptional lawyers who are 40 years of age or under, or who have been practicing for 10 years or less, and have attained a high degree of peer recognition and professional achievement. Only 2.5 percent of the total lawyers in the state are honored on the Rising Stars® list. Rising Stars® Brent A. Meyer - Construction Litigation Shannon M. Sprinkle - Professional Liability: Defense Peter Werdesheim - Professional Liability - Defense

Shannon Sprinkle presented Title Standards and Lawyer Liability on Oct 2. At 11:00 a.m. as part of the Title Standards seminar. The seminar was sent via Videoconference broadcast to the Coastal Georgia Office (Savannah) and the South Georgia Office (Tifton) of the State Bar of Georgia. The program originated with an audience at the State Bar of Georgia Conference Center in Atlanta. Register at: http://www.iclega.org/programs/8976.html.      

"Justices Weigh How Far Law Firm Advertising Can Go", published in the April 21, 2015 edition of the Fulton County Daily Report, features a case Shannon Sprinkle argued in front of the Georgia Supreme Court recently. The case is testing the limits in how far a law firm go in criticizing potential litigation targets while advertising for potential clients. Read the full article here. 

Carlock, Copeland & Stair, LLP is proud to announce that 17 of our lawyers have been selected for inclusion on the Super Lawyers® and Rising Stars lists for 2015. Only five percent of the lawyers in the state are named by Super Lawyers. The selections for this esteemed list are made by the research team at Super Lawyers, which is a service of the Thomson Reuters. Each year, the research team at Super Lawyers undertakes a rigorous multi-phase selection process that includes a statewide survey of lawyers, independent evaluation of candidates by the attorney-led research staff, a peer review of candidates by practice area, and a good-standing and disciplinary check. Super Lawyers

• Thomas S. Carlock
• Wade K. Copeland
• Eric J. Frisch
• Johannes S. Kingma
• D. Gary Lovell, Jr.
• W. Dan McGrew
• David F. Root
• Douglas W. Smith
• Kent T. Stair
• Fred M. Valz, III

• John L. Bunyan
• Brent A. Meyer
• Heather H. Miller
• Shannon M. Sprinkle
• Peter Werdesheim

Carlock, Copeland & Stair congratulates Shannon M. Sprinkle on being selected to serve as the Firm’s General Counsel. As General Counsel, Shannon will be responsible for the overall management of legal concerns and services for the firm. Specifically, she has primary responsibility for management of the firm’s professional liability processes and risk management and will advise the firm on a wide variety of issues. Shannon Sprinkle is a Partner in the Atlanta office and co-chair of the commercial litigation practice group. For the past ten years, Shannon has focused her practice primarily on professional malpractice and real estate related claims. She has substantial experience defending legal malpractice claims arising out of: litigation, family law, business organization, estate matters, real estate transactions, and commercial transactions. She also frequently defends accounting malpractice claims involving: tax preparation, consulting, compilations, reviews, audits, and breach of fiduciary duty claims. Shannon also defends law firms, lenders, and other businesses against individual and class-action claims for alleged violations of consumer protection statutes, such as the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act, Truth in Lending Act, Real Estate Settlement Procedures Act, Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act, and others. She also provides compliance and risk management advice in these areas, as well as data and privacy breach claims. Shannon frequently participates in and speaks at seminars on professional ethics and malpractice, and has authored several papers targeted toward malpractice avoidance. For several years she co-presented an annual risk management seminar for the insureds of a large national insurer.

Carlock, Copeland & Stair, LLP is proud to announce that 17 of our lawyers have been selected for inclusion on the Super Lawyers® and Rising Stars lists for 2014. Only five percent of the lawyers in the state are named by Super Lawyers. The selections for this esteemed list are made by the research team at Super Lawyers, which is a service of the Thomson Reuters. Each year, the research team at Super Lawyers undertakes a rigorous multi-phase selection process that includes a statewide survey of lawyers, independent evaluation of candidates by the attorney-led research staff, a peer review of candidates by practice area, and a good-standing and disciplinary check. Super Lawyers

• Thomas S. Carlock
• Wade K. Copeland
• Kent T. Stair
• Douglas W. Smith
• David F. Root
• W. Dan McGrew
• Johannes S. Kingma
• D. Gary Lovell, Jr.
• Eric J. Frisch

• Shannon M. Sprinkle
• Peter Werdesheim
• Heather H. Miller
• Ryan B. Wilhelm
• John L. Bunyan
• Cheryl H. Shaw
• Brent A. Meyer

We are proud to announce that 14 of our lawyers have been selected for inclusion on the Georgia Super Lawyers® and Rising Stars lists for 2013. Super Lawyers Thomas S. Carlock Wade K. Copeland Kent T. Stair Douglas W. Smith David F. Root W. Dan McGrew Johannes S. Kingma D. Gary Lovell, Jr. Eric J. Frisch Only five percent of the lawyers in the state are named by Super Lawyers. The selections for this esteemed list are made by the research team at Super Lawyers, which is a service of the Thomson Reuters. Each year, the research team at Super Lawyers undertakes a rigorous multi-phase selection process that includes a statewide survey of lawyers, independent evaluation of candidates by the attorney-led research staff, a peer review of candidates by practice area, and a good-standing and disciplinary check. Rising Stars Shannon M. Sprinkle Peter Werdesheim Heather H. Miller Ryan B. Wilhelm John L. Bunyan Rising Stars is a listing of exceptional lawyers who are 40 years of age or under, or who have been practicing for 10 years or less, and have attained a high degree of peer recognition and professional achievement. Only 2.5 percent of the total lawyers in the state are honored on the Rising Stars list.

Shannon Sprinkle appeared on the October 7, 2012 episode of PBA 30's "Leyes Cotidianas" (Everyday Law) where she provided the defense and lawyer's perspective on legal malpractice claims.

We are proud to announce that 14 of our lawyers have been selected for inclusion on the Georgia Super Lawyers® and Rising Stars lists for 2012. Super Lawyers Thomas S. Carlock Wade K. Copeland Kent T. Stair Douglas W. Smith David F. Root W. Dan McGrew Fred M. Valz, III Johannes S. Kingma D. Gary Lovell, Jr. Eric J. Frisch Only five percent of the lawyers in the state are named by Super Lawyers. The selections for this esteemed list are made by the research team at Super Lawyers, which is a service of the Thomson Reuters. Each year, the research team at Super Lawyersundertakes a rigorous multi-phase selection process that includes a statewide survey of lawyers, independent evaluation of candidates by the attorney-led research staff, a peer review of candidates by practice area, and a good-standing and disciplinary check. Rising Stars Shannon M. Sprinkle Peter Werdesheim Heather H. Miller John L. Bunyan Rising Stars is a listing of exceptional lawyers who are 40 years of age or under, or who have been practicing for 10 years or less, and have attained a high degree of peer recognition and professional achievement. Only 2.5 percent of the total lawyers in the state are honored on the Rising Stars list.

We are proud to announce that 15 of our attorneys have been selected for inclusion on the Georgia Super Lawyers® and Rising Stars lists for 2011. Super Lawyers Honorees Thomas S. Carlock Wade K. Copeland Kent T. Stair Douglas W. Smith David F. Root W. Dan McGrew Fred M. Valz, III Johannes S. Kingma D. Gary Lovell, Jr. Eric J. Frisch Only five percent of the lawyers in the state are named by Super Lawyers. The selections for this esteemed list are made by the research team at Super Lawyers, which is a service of the Thomson Reuters, Legal division based in Eagan, MN. Each year, the research team at Super Lawyers undertakes a rigorous multi-phase selection process that includes a statewide survey of lawyers, independent evaluation of candidates by the attorney-led research staff, a peer review of candidates by practice area, and a good-standing and disciplinary check. Rising Stars Honorees Shannon M. Sprinkle Peter Werdesheim Heather H. Miller Spencer A. Bomar Ryan B. Wilhelm Rising Stars is a listing of exceptional lawyers who are 40 years or under, or who have been practicing for 10 years or less and have attained a high degree of peer recognition and professional achievement. Only 2.5 percent of the total lawyers in the state are honored on the Rising Stars list.

We are proud to announce that 15 of our attorneys have been selected for inclusion on the Georgia Super Lawyers® and Rising Stars lists for 2010. Super Lawyers Honorees Thomas S. Carlock Wade K. Copeland Kent T. Stair Douglas W. Smith David F. Root W. Dan McGrew Fred M. Valz, III Johannes S. Kingma D. Gary Lovell, Jr. Eric J. Frisch Only five percent of the lawyers in the state are named by Super Lawyers. The selections for this esteemed list are made by the research team at Super Lawyers, which is a service of the Thomson Reuters, Legal division based in Eagan, MN. Each year, the research team at Super Lawyers undertakes a rigorous multi-phase selection process that includes a statewide survey of lawyers, independent evaluation of candidates by the attorney-led research staff, a peer review of candidates by practice area, and a good-standing and disciplinary check. Rising Stars Honorees Shannon M. Sprinkle John C. Rogers Pete Werdesheim Ryan B. Wilhelm Rising Stars is a listing of exceptional lawyers who are 40 years or under, or who have been practicing for 10 years or less and have attained a high degree of peer recognition and professional achievement. Only 2.5 percent of the total lawyers in the state are honored on the Rising Stars list.

Commercial Litigation Blog Posting by Shannon Sprinkle. I had the pleasure of attending the Ascent 2017 Conference in Atlanta, on invitation from Sloane Perras, Chief Legal Officer for The Krystal Co. & On The Border Mexican Grill & Cantina and one of the conference organizers.  The conference was a great success and brought together more women in-house and outside counsel at one time than any other event I’ve attended.  A few points I took away:

1. Pay equity, diversity, and social awareness are all being embraced by many large companies, with the view that those policies raise all boats.  These companies are using their leverage to encourage adoption of these initiatives by their vendors and outside counsel.
2. To be a successful partner as outside counsel, we must understand the client’s business above all else: the financials, the product lines, the risk factors, and the business objectives.  Both inside and outside counsel must find and capture the tone that will speak to the decision-makers while uncovering any blind spots or potential liabilities not considered.
3. Data breaches remain front of mind for many.  The alphabet soup of regulations, laws, and governing watch-bodies that might be implicated in any given industry continues to grow.  Class action lawyers stand at the ready to push the bounds of what constitutes damages.
4. Leaders must create a culture of compliance.  The risks of not doing so far outweigh the costs.
5. Finally, when pushing for change, leaders must be unafraid and confident in their decisions.  Innovation must be balanced with risk management; if you understand the core of the problem and have a vision for moving forward, you can convince stakeholders change is necessary.

Recent blog posting by Shannon Sprinkle. Galaria v. Nationwide Mutual Ins. Co., U.S. Court of Appeals, 6th Cir. (September 12, 2015) This case arises out of an October 3, 2012 hack into Nationwide Mutual Insurance Company’s computer network, which exposed the personal information of the putative class action Plaintiffs and 1.1 million others.  Nationwide informed the Plaintiffs of the breach by letter, advising that they should take steps to prevent or mitigate misuse of the stolen data, including monitoring bank statements and credit reports for unusual activity.  Nationwide offered a year of free credit monitoring and identity fraud protection of up to $1,000,000 through a third-party vendor.  Nationwide also suggested that victims set up a fraud alert and place a security freeze on their credit reports.  Nationwide acknowledged that such a security freeze could, however, impede consumers’ ability to obtain credit and could cost between $5.00 to $20.00 to place and/or remove.  Nationwide did not offer to pay for expenses associated with a security freeze. Multiple putative class action complaints were filed, alleging willful and negligent violations of the Fair Credit Reporting Act (FCRA), negligence, invasion of privacy by public disclosure of private facts, and bailment.  Plaintiffs contended that the Nationwide data breach created an “imminent, immediate and continuing increased risk” that Plaintiffs and other class members would be subject to identity fraud.  As risk, Plaintiffs referenced the illicit international market for stolen data used to obtain identification, government benefits, employment, housing, medical services, financial services, and credit and debit cards.  Plaintiffs also pointed to the potential that a victim’s identify could be used by identity thieves when arrested, resulting in warrants issued in victim’s name.  Plaintiffs cited a study purporting to show that in 2011, recipients of data breach notifications were 9.6 times more likely to experience identity fraud, and had a fraud incident rate of 19%. Plaintiffs further alleged victims of identity theft and fraud typically spend hundreds of hours in personal time and hundreds of dollars in personal funds, incurring an average of $354.00 in out- of- pocket expenses and $1,513.00 in total economic loss to mitigate the risk.  Plaintiffs alleged that they had suffered and would continue to suffer both financial and temporal costs to continue monitoring their credit information. Nationwide filed a Motion to Dismiss, which was granted by the district court. The lower court agreed with Nationwide’s arguments that Plaintiffs did not have statutory standing under the FCRA and thus dismissed those claims for lack of subject matter jurisdiction.  The district court also dismissed the negligence and bailment claims, finding that Plaintiffs did not have Article III standing because they had not alleged a cognizable injury.  Lastly, the district court held that Plaintiffs had standing to bring their invasion of privacy claim but failed to state a claim for relief and dismissed that claim with prejudice.  Plaintiffs appealed the dismissal of all counts except for the invasion of privacy claim. Article III of the U.S. constitution limits the jurisdiction of federal courts to Cases and Controversies.  The doctrine of standing gives meaning to these constitutional limits by identifying those disputes which are appropriately resolved through the judicial process.  Constitutional standing consists of three elements: (1) Plaintiff must have suffered an injury in fact; (2) that is fairly traceable to the challenged conduct of a Defendant; and (3) that is likely to be redressed by a favorable judicial decision. To establish injury in fact, a Plaintiff must show he or she suffered “an invasion of a legally protected interest that is concrete and particularized and actual or imminent, not conjectural or hypothetical.  When standing is based on an imminent injury, the Supreme Court has explained that threatened injury must be certainly impending to constitute injury in fact and allegations of possible future injury are not sufficient.  However, standing can be based on a “substantial risk” that harm will occur, which may prompt Plaintiffs to reasonably incur cost to mitigate or avoid that harm, even where it is not “literally certain the harms they identify will come about.” In this case, the Court of Appeals found that Plaintiffs’ allegations of a substantial risk of harm, coupled with reasonably incurred mitigation costs, were sufficient to establish a cognizable Article III injury at the pleading stage of the litigation.  The Court held there was no need for speculation where Plaintiffs alleged their data had already been stolen and was now in the hands of ill-intentioned criminals.  Indeed, the Court pointed to the fact that Nationwide seemed to recognize the severity of the risk, given its offer to provide credit monitoring and identity theft protection.  Thus, although it might not be “literally certain” that Plaintiffs’ data will be misused, there was sufficiently substantial risk of harm that incurring mitigation cost was reasonable. The 6th Circuit held that all of the required elements were met, and thus, the Plaintiffs adequately alleged Article III standing. In reaching its decision, the 6th Circuit pointed to two recent 7th Circuit cases with similar findings and a 9th Circuit case finding Article III standing as well.  However, the Court (and the dissent) noted the current split between these decisions and other Circuits. The precedential effect of this opinion will be difficult to tell for some time.  As an unpublished, divided opinion, its citing authority may be limited.  However, its discussion and analysis of Article III standing may well signal that the bar has been lowered for future claims and defense of these claims will have to shift to other grounds. Please click here for more information on our Cyber Liability Blog.

Joe Kingma and the Accounting Malpractice Defense Team presented Risk Management for Audit and Accounting Firms at The Buckhead Club on May 19. Five Takeaways from the Carlock Copeland & Stair Accounting Risk Management Program 1. The Panama Papers, and Big Data in general, demonstrate the risk posed for accountants when clients hide or launder money offshore. An international consortium of major news sources is actively soliciting more leaks and tax officials from 28 countries met in April to plan a joint strategy to mine the Panama Papers for gold. High profile individuals whose names appear in the Papers searchable, online data base include: Lionel Messi, Jackie Chan, Simon Cowell, David Geffen, Pedro Almodovar, Nick Faldo, and Emma Watson. The database lists many U.S. CPA firms and diagrams their relation to various suspect transactions. Governments from Russia to Britain to Argentina have been rocked by the disclosures. Don’t get your firm's name added to the list and avoid overly aggressive strategies. Protect your own files from those who might like to steal your clients’ confidential information. 2. Professional judgment is what you get paid for, but can also be what you get sued for. Audit engagements in particular require lots of judgment calls. Make sure your firm’s work reflects good judgment and that those who make the judgment calls are properly trained and professionally skeptical. If you have young auditors in the field without onsite partner supervision, talk through the tough issues with them in advance. Do what you can to make your firm’s judgment solid and defensible. 3. Read your insurance policies. Policy provisions may be negotiable and you may gain value in ways beyond premium reductions. Be very accurate when filling out your application and compare it to your website. Submitting a neat and accurate application can save you real money. Price should not be your only consideration and you should check to see which carriers treat their clients well. Insurance coverage remains very reasonably priced and cyber coverage is a great deal. 4. Jurors hold outside accountants to high standards when a client suffers from internal fraud. You must keep your eyes and ears wide open even if you are just doing a tax return or a compilation. Take another look at your engagement letters to make sure you have included all the damage limitations and disclaimers the laws allows and avoid engagements where the client’s lack of internal controls creates too much risk. 5. Accountants are getting sued for defamation even when they make statements in good faith and in the course of their clients' engagements. Sometimes clients try to use your staff to say bad things about their employees. Don’t let your firm get sued for defamation that may not be covered by insurance.  

Shannon Sprinkle presented Up Market (and Down Market) Risks.  This presentation on risks of claims arising from failing businesses and economic downturns included a review of lessons learned from past mistakes.  The improving market brings new challenges and risks to accounting and audit firms such as, risks inherent in an aging workforce, emerging technologies and new financial fraud schemes.

Shannon Sprinkle will present Title Standards and Lawyer Liability on Oct 2. At 11:00 a.m. as part of the Title Standards seminar. The seminar will be broadcast via Videoconference to the Coastal Georgia Office (Savannah) and the South Georgia Office (Tifton) of the State Bar of Georgia. The program will originate with an audience at the State Bar of Georgia Conference Center in Atlanta. Register at: http://www.iclega.org/programs/8976.html.  

Joe Kingma and Shannon Sprinkle presented “Mock Cross Examination of An Accountant and Lawyer” at the Carlock Copeland & Stair Professional Liability Seminar on May 5, 2015 at The Buckhead Club.

Shannon Sprinkle presented "Title Standards and Lawyer Liability" at the ICLE/Real Property Law Section, State Bar of Georgia September Title Standards Seminar.

Shannon Sprinkle attended and reported from the Spring 2014 National Legal Malpractice Conference in Boston, authoring an article: “‘Lost Opportunity’ Malpractice Claims: A Different Universe From Case Within A Case” which was published in the May 21, 2014 Issue of Insights (BNA). Reproduced with permission from ABA/BNA Lawyers’ Manual on Professional Conduct, Current Reports, 30 Law. Man. Prof. Conduct 349, 5/21/14. Copyright 2014 by The American Bar Association and The Bureau of National Affairs, Inc. (800-372-1033) http://www.bna.com

"Trends and Tips for Avoiding Legal Malpractice in Commercial Real Estate." Shannon Sprinkle. 2013 ICLE Commercial Real Estate Seminar. November 6, 2013. (Atlanta, GA)

Shannon Sprinkle presented at the Third Annual State Bar of Georgia Professional Liability Section seminar, "Houston...We have A Problem" - Not Your Typical Malpractice Seminar. on March 20, 2013 in Atlanta.

"Current E&O Issues for Foreclosure Practitioners and Review of Relevant Litigation Cases." Shannon Sprinkle. 2012 ICLE Real Property Foreclosure Seminar. November 2, 2012. (Atlanta, GA)

Shannon Sprinkle appeared on the October 7, 2012 episode of PBA 30's "Leyes Cotidianas" (Everyday Law) where she provided the defense and lawyer's perspective on legal malpractice claims.  

"Malpractice Update - Who is Your Client and Who Else to Worry About." Shannon Sprinkle. State Bar of Georgia Annual Meeting 2012. May 31, 2012. (Savannah, GA)

"Georgia’s Transition from Foreseeable to Assignable: Villanueva v. First Am. Title Ins. Co." Shannon M. Sprinkle. Carlock, Copeland & Stair Quarterly Newsletter; Volume 9, Number 1. Spring 2012.

"Legal malpractice claims now assignable in Georgia." Shannon M. Sprinkle. LPL eAdvisory, an enewsletter from the ABA Standing Committee on Lawyers' Professional Liability. December 2011.

"E&O Topics for Foreclosure Practitioners." Shannon Sprinkle. 2011 Real Property Foreclosure ICLE Seminar; Atlanta, GA. November 4, 2011.

John Rogers and Shannon Sprinkle assumed the role of Counsel of Record for Defense during a malpractice scenario at the first ever State Bar of Georgia Professional Liability Section seminar. "Houston...We have A Problem" - Not Your Typical Malpractice Seminar took place on May 5, 2011 in Atlanta. Please visit the ICLE website for more information.

"E&O Topics for Foreclosure Practitioners." Shannon Sprinkle. 2010 Real Property Foreclosure ICLE Seminar; Atlanta, GA. April 1, 2010.

"E&O Topics for Foreclosure Practitioners." Shannon Sprinkle. 2009 Real Property Foreclosure Seminar, Atlanta, GA. April 3, 2009.

"Packing Your Parachute: Preparing for Practice Risk." Johannes S. Kingma, and Shannon M. Sprinkle. Insurance Risk Management Seminar for Attorneys. October 6, 2006 (Atlanta, GA); October 19, 2006 (Mobile, AL); October 20, 2006 (Birmingham, AL); November 6, 2006 (Charleston, SC); November 13, 2006 (Columbia, SC); September 14, 2007 (Atlanta, GA); September 26, 2007 (Greensboro, NC); October 9, 2007 (Mobile, AL); October 12, 2007 (Birmingham, AL); November 2, 2007 (Atlanta, GA); October 2008 (Atlanta, GA); October 2008 (Birmingham, AL); October 2008 (Macon, GA); November 2008 (Raleigh, NC).

"E&O Topics for Foreclosure Practitioners." Joe Kingma, John Rogers, Shannon Sprinkle and Pete Werdesheim. ICLE seminar; Atlanta, GA. April 2008.

"Recent Developments in Legal Ethics." Shannon M. Sprinkle and Pete Werdesheim. Lorman: Real Estate Litigation in Georgia. July 13, 2007 (Atlanta, GA).

"Prevention and Defense of Legal Malpractice." Shannon M. Sprinkle. April 26, 2007 (Atlanta, GA).

"Current Errors & Omissions: Topics for Foreclosure Practitioners." Johannes S. Kingma, Shannon M. Sprinkle, John C. Rogers and Julia A. Merritt. ICLE: Real Property Foreclosure ICLE: Real Property Foreclosure. April 16, 2004 (Atlanta, GA); April 29, 2005 (Atlanta, GA); April 6, 2007 (Atlanta, GA).

"Smart Practice, Not Malpractice." Johannes S. Kingma and Shannon M. Sprinkle. Risk Management Seminar. June 22, 2004 (Atlanta, GA); June 28, 2005 (Atlanta, GA); October 28, 2005 (Mobile, AL); November 4, 2005 (Atlanta, GA); December 9, 2005 (Birmingham, AL).