logo
Columbus lawyer who won $42 million verdict is now suspended by Georgia Supreme Court

Columbus lawyer who won $42 million verdict is now suspended by Georgia Supreme Court

Yahoo06-03-2025

The Supreme Court of Georgia has suspended a Columbus lawyer.
Chris Breault, a Columbus lawyer who specializes in personal injury lawsuits, received a six-month suspension of his law license for what the court said are violations of the Georgia Rules of Professional Conduct.
The violations involve events that happened in 2017, when he was brought on a case to act as lead counsel for a husband and wife, according to court documents.
The husband suffered two breaks in his back and a skull fracture after a tractor trailer struck his truck, which caused it to go over the side of a bridge and into the Savannah River, court documents say.
Court documents say Breault came to believe the clients needed to pursue a claim based on traumatic brain injury and learned the husband had been treated by a neurologist. Breault and a Georgia lawyer, identified as 'C.M.,' met with the physician, according to court documents.
Court documents say C.M. made an audio recording of the meeting unbeknownst to Breault or the physician.
'During this meeting, the physician described the Husband's purported brain injury as 'all kind of speculative' and made remarks casting doubt on the possible brain injury claim,' the court documents say.
Breault called the office manager on June 14, 2017, and canceled the deposition following this meeting, according to the documents.
Breault called and talk talked to the office manager June 20, 2017, regarding whether the physician would be able to testify at trial. The office manager told Breault the physician wouldn't be able to due to their workload, according to court documents.
Court documents say Breault responded in a threatening manner, stating the physician would have to do a deposition or he (Breault) would subpoena him for trial.
Court documents say the defendants in the lawsuit filed a motion the following day to revoke Breault's pro hac vice admission to the case because his actions violated the court's guidelines for courtroom conduct. Breault was previously given a pro hac vice admission, which allows for the addition of an attorney to a case where they are not licensed to practice, according to the Cornell Law School website.
The defendant's motion included an affidavit from the office manager detailing the conversation, court documents say. Breault responded to the motion without discussing it with the clients, according to court documents.
Court documents say Breault included a transcript of the audio recording taken by C.M. during the June 7, 2017, meeting with the physician.
Breault also obtained an audio recording of the meeting and sent it to all lawyers in the case and to the court, according to the documents.
'In his response to the defendant's motion to revoke, Breault admitted that the recording was 'attorney work product and includes many insights into how the Plaintiff[s] view every part of this case,' and that his actions 'tipp[ed] the 'playing field' in favor of the Defendants by disclosing this work product,' but that he 'fe[lt] the esteem and confidence of this Honorable Court are more important,' the documents say.
Court documents say Breault admitted at a disciplinary hearing that he made the disclosures public to make the defense counsel look like 'a disingenuous a**hole.'
The district court denied the defendant's motion but found the disclosure of the conversation was unnecessary and damaging to the clients' case, court documents say.
Breault was allowed to add a neuropsychologist to the client's witness list and was ordered to depose the neuropsychologist by the middle of August 2017, according to court documents.
Court documents say Breault told defense counsel that 10 a.m. on Aug. 14, 2017, would work for the neuropsychologist's deposition without having confirmed the date with the neuropsychologist.
The neuropsychologist informed the parties that he wouldn't be available that day, court documents say.
'Breault told defense counsel that he would ask the court for more time to schedule the deposition, but he never filed the request,' court documents say.
Breault was discharged by the clients Aug. 16, 2017, through a hand-delivered letter, according to court documents.
Court documents say the following day Breault went unannounced to the clients' home in South Carolina, called into question the competency of the clients' remaining counsel and told them they would lose out on funding for medical treatment if he were removed from the case.
The wife texted Breault after hisvisit, telling him she didn't want him to represent them, and Breault acknowledged the message and said he would file withdrawal paperwork the following day, according to court documents.
Court documents say Breault failed to file the withdrawal paperwork and instead advised the husband to seek legal advice from a litigation funding company and reached out to the wife, requesting she attend a focus group about the case.
The clients filed a motion to revoke Breault's pro hac vice admission, according to court documents.
Court documents say Breault filed a response 54 days after being discharged as counsel and again disclosed confidential information he gained while representing the clients.
Breault filed withdrawal paperwork following an Oct. 30, 2017, disciplinary hearing, according to court documents.
'The district court entered a Disciplinary Order, in which it found that Breault had violated several provisions of the GRPC (Georgia Rules of Professional Conduct) and that his disclosures of the Clients' protected information had been damaging to the Clients, and revoked Breault's pro hac vice admission,' the documents say.
Breault's suspension began Tuesday and will end after six months with 'no conditions on Breault's reinstatement other than the passage of time,' according to court documents.
The Ledger-Enquirer asked Breault for comment and received the following statement in an email:
''I have never once in my entire career been in trouble with the State Bar of Georgia. If you look at my record since I finished law school at the University of Georgia in 2012, twelve (12) years ago, I have zero Bar complaints or Bar discipline. It is odd that it is 2025, weeks after I get a $42 million jury verdict — the largest jury verdict in Georgia history in a motorcycle wreck — and I'm being said to have violated Bar rules from a case in 2017.
'I did excellent work for the client in that case they are talking about from 2017. Because of my work, the client became a millionaire. This all took place back in June of 2017, one month before trial. I was hired by the client's original lawyer to come and try the case in court as lead trial counsel. The client in the case was rear-ended by a tractor trailer and sent off a large bridge, falling nearly 200 feet. I came onto the case, proved he had a brain injury, and then the case settled for seven-figures and the client was happy. Because of my work, the client took home more than double what he was going to get before I was hired.
'I stand by my work in that case. I'm the first lawyer in Georgia history that they've ever accused of breaking these rules like this. I was part of a team of four (4) lawyers and I'm the only one they say violated a Bar rule. For years, they wanted me to take some slap-on-the-wrist penalty as long as I admitted I did something wrong. I refused, because I did nothing wrong. I'm sorry that in order to get outstanding results, you have to do things differently than your average Joe Schmoe lawyer out there. It means that you are creative and think outside the box. It doesn't mean you 'broke the rules.'
'After reading the Supreme Court's order on this matter, it's clear that whoever wrote it — sometimes it's a clerk or an assistant — does not have or understand all the facts. I plan to submit a motion for reconsideration to the court in ten (10) days to have them review it.
'As stated by Reverend Martin Luther King Jr., 'the arc of the moral universe is long, and it bends towards Justice.' If you are willing to work and seize the opportunities that God provides, then God will take care of you. That has been my experience and I expect that to continue in the future.'

Orange background

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Comments

No comments yet...

Related Articles

Kate Beckinsale sues 'Canary Black' producers on claims of negligence and battery, citing 'unsafe conditions' on set
Kate Beckinsale sues 'Canary Black' producers on claims of negligence and battery, citing 'unsafe conditions' on set

Yahoo

timea day ago

  • Yahoo

Kate Beckinsale sues 'Canary Black' producers on claims of negligence and battery, citing 'unsafe conditions' on set

Kate Beckinsale is taking legal action against the producers of her 2024 thriller Canary Black. The Serendipity star is accusing Anton Entertainment and producer John Zois of negligence, intentional infliction of emotional distress, and battery in a May 21 amended complaint filed in Los Angeles Superior Court. The document, which Entertainment Weekly has obtained and reviewed, claims that Beckinsale suffered a knee injury after being exposed to "dangerous and unsafe conditions" on the film's set. Puck was the first to report on the news. The complaint claims, "Ms. Beckinsale and her team repeatedly raised red flags regarding unsafe conditions on and off set to Defendants, including long, dangerous set days, often lasting fifteen hours, inadequate equipment and medical personnel to help manage the high physical workload and recover from the exertion off set, and failure to adequately inform Ms. Beckinsale of what stunts she was expected to perform until often the moment she had to perform it." Beckinsale further alleges that despite the repeated concerns, the producers "continued to recklessly and intentionally forge ahead with unsafe filming conditions, forgoing safety to maintain profit margins, and in the process, put Ms. Beckinsale in harm's way." Beckinsale first took action against the film's producers in December, initially filing as a Jane Doe but in the newly amended complaint, details her on-set injury and several communications between her team and the film's producers. The complaint claims that Beckinsale's team reached out to producers several times to express their concerns. At one point, Beckinsale's agent, Shani Rosenzweig, wrote in an email to Zois, "No one is actually taking real action to put a plan in place to fix this situation so it never happens again… [Ms. Beckinsale] keeps showing up to set for her call time and everyone around her has been made aware it's going to be a 15 hour [or more] day except for her." Rosenzweig demanded immediate action to address the unsafe conditions, asking Zois to explain his plans for course correcting and adding, "If you're trying to kill a person, you're doing a great job." Per the complaint, Zois responded, "I don't know what else to say other than you're right," and agreed to shorten Beckinsale's work days, calling the pace of production "unsustainable." But Beckinsale's attorneys claim that "set conditions continued to be dangerous," despite Zois's promise, "with production staff routinely pushing Ms. Beckinsale to shoot for fifteen hourdays, and perform dangerous action sequences, without pre-clearing or pre-training." In December 2022, Beckinsale suffered a complex meniscus tear in her left knee while filming. The injury required surgery and halted production for months. Before returning to set, Beckinsale's surgeon insisted that the actress not be asked to perform stunts involving running, jumping, harness suspension, squatting, or kicking. This request was allegedly disregarded. Beckinsale's complaint claims that she suffered further aggravation of the knee injury as her doctors orders were repeatedly ignored and she was allegedly coerced into performing "unsafe action sequences." Representatives for Zois and Anton Entertainment did not immediately respond to Entertainment Weekly's request for comment. The lawsuit is not the first time Beckinsale has opened up about her on set struggles. In the wake of Blake Lively filing a complaint against her It Ends With Us costar Justin Baldoni — accusing him of sexual harassment and coordinating an online smear campaign against her — Beckinsale lauded the actress for the move in a now-deleted Instagram video. "I'm grateful to Blake Lively for highlighting the fact that this is not an archaic problem that no one's facing," Beckinsale said. "This is continuing. And then when it does happen, a machine goes into place to absolutely destroy you. And I'm sure that's the case in other industries as well. And it's just got to stop."The video also saw her outline some instances of on-set abuse. Though she did not specify the projects, Beckinsale claimed that on the set of two films, she was put in a "very unsafe fight situation," and on one of them, was "gaslit and made to feel like I was the problem" after being injured. She added, "There's a certain kind of actor who gets kind of a thrill out of legally being able to harm a woman during a fight sequence." Read the original article on Entertainment Weekly

Gavin Newsom Seeks Immediate Order To Block Donald Trump's Federal Troop Patrols In Los Angeles
Gavin Newsom Seeks Immediate Order To Block Donald Trump's Federal Troop Patrols In Los Angeles

Yahoo

time2 days ago

  • Yahoo

Gavin Newsom Seeks Immediate Order To Block Donald Trump's Federal Troop Patrols In Los Angeles

California Governor Gavin Newsom said that the state is now seeking a temporary restraining order to block President Donald Trump from dispatching troops to patrol Los Angeles. Newsom wrote on X, 'Trump is turning the U.S. military against American citizens. The courts must immediately block these illegal actions.' More from Deadline Michael Stipe, Jason Isbell * Brandi Carlile Among Artists Featured On Album To Benefit Democracy Forward's Legal Challenges Judge Rejects Sean "Diddy" Combs' Latest Motion For Mistrial In Sex-Trafficking Case - Update Denise Rehrig Named Executive Producer Of ABC News Live's 'Prime With Linsey Davis' Read Newsom's motion about Trump troop deployment. In the motion filed on Tuesday in U.S. District Court in San Francisco, Newsom and state officials argued that 'they seek to preserve (in part) the status quo by temporarily enjoining Defendants from ordering or deploying the active- duty members of the military and federalized National Guard soldiers to patrol communities or otherwise engage in general law enforcement activities beyond the immediate vicinity of federal buildings or other federal real property.' They argued that the 'use of the military and the federalized National Guard deprives the State of vital resources, escalates tensions and promotes (rather than quells) civil unrest. By contrast, the public interest is served if the Court enjoins Defendants from further militarizing California's communities to allow State and local law enforcement to fulfill their duties to enforce State law. Moreover, a preliminary injunction will not harm Defendants: the Department of Homeland Security can continue to enforce immigration law and the DOD Defendants will merely be ordered to comply with the PCA and statutes governing the federalization of the National Guard.' Newsom filed suit against Trump and the administration on Monday, arguing that the president overstepped his authority when he dispatched National Guard troops to the region to respond to protests of ICE immigration raids. Newsom said that Trump violated the law by not consulting with him first before the deployment. More to come. Best of Deadline Sean 'Diddy' Combs Sex-Trafficking Trial Updates: Cassie Ventura's Testimony, $10M Hotel Settlement, Drugs, Violence, & The Feds A Full Timeline Of Blake Lively & Justin Baldoni's 'It Ends With Us' Feud In Court, Online & In The Media Where To Watch All The 'John Wick' Movies: Streamers That Have All Four Films

Gavin Newsom Seeks Immediate Order To Block Donald Trump's Federal Troop Patrols In Los Angeles
Gavin Newsom Seeks Immediate Order To Block Donald Trump's Federal Troop Patrols In Los Angeles

Yahoo

time2 days ago

  • Yahoo

Gavin Newsom Seeks Immediate Order To Block Donald Trump's Federal Troop Patrols In Los Angeles

California Governor Gavin Newsom said that the state is now seeking a temporary restraining order to block President Donald Trump from dispatching troops to patrol Los Angeles. Newsom wrote on X, 'Trump is turning the U.S. military against American citizens. The courts must immediately block these illegal actions.' More from Deadline Michael Stipe, Jason Isbell * Brandi Carlile Among Artists Featured On Album To Benefit Democracy Forward's Legal Challenges Judge Rejects Sean "Diddy" Combs' Latest Motion For Mistrial In Sex-Trafficking Case - Update Denise Rehrig Named Executive Producer Of ABC News Live's 'Prime With Linsey Davis' Read Newsom's motion about Trump troop deployment. In the motion filed on Tuesday in U.S. District Court in San Francisco, Newsom and state officials argued that 'they seek to preserve (in part) the status quo by temporarily enjoining Defendants from ordering or deploying the active- duty members of the military and federalized National Guard soldiers to patrol communities or otherwise engage in general law enforcement activities beyond the immediate vicinity of federal buildings or other federal real property.' They argued that the 'use of the military and the federalized National Guard deprives the State of vital resources, escalates tensions and promotes (rather than quells) civil unrest. By contrast, the public interest is served if the Court enjoins Defendants from further militarizing California's communities to allow State and local law enforcement to fulfill their duties to enforce State law. Moreover, a preliminary injunction will not harm Defendants: the Department of Homeland Security can continue to enforce immigration law and the DOD Defendants will merely be ordered to comply with the PCA and statutes governing the federalization of the National Guard.' Newsom filed suit against Trump and the administration on Monday, arguing that the president overstepped his authority when he dispatched National Guard troops to the region to respond to protests of ICE immigration raids. Newsom said that Trump violated the law by not consulting with him first before the deployment. More to come. Best of Deadline Sean 'Diddy' Combs Sex-Trafficking Trial Updates: Cassie Ventura's Testimony, $10M Hotel Settlement, Drugs, Violence, & The Feds A Full Timeline Of Blake Lively & Justin Baldoni's 'It Ends With Us' Feud In Court, Online & In The Media Where To Watch All The 'John Wick' Movies: Streamers That Have All Four Films

DOWNLOAD THE APP

Get Started Now: Download the App

Ready to dive into the world of global news and events? Download our app today from your preferred app store and start exploring.
app-storeplay-store