Georgia Judge Rules Against State AG in Case Against Collection Law Firm

A Superior Court judge in Georgia ruled recently that the state’s attorney general’s office, acting on behalf of the Governor’s Office of Consumer Affairs, overstepped constitutional bounds in demanding documents from a law firm practicing debt collection in the state.

Cobb County Superior Court Judge S. Lark Ingram, called the state’s demand from Frederick J. Hanna & Associates a violation of the state constitution’s separation of powers doctrine. The law firm is based in Marietta, Ga.

Georgia’s Office of Consumer Affairs (OCA) was investigating Frederick J. Hanna & Associates (FJH) pursuant to complaints the office had received from consumers about debt collection practices. The OCA had requested documents from the law firm to determine if its practices ran afoul of state debt collection protections.

But Fred Hanna told insideARM that the office’s request was unnecessarily burdensome. “They requested all of our files going back four years,” said Hanna. “They wanted files on all of our cases and all of our employees over that time.” Hanna noted that his firm employs 416 people and handles thousands of cases. The request from OCA would have resulted in hundreds of thousands of files.

Hanna said that his firm offered to hand over all of the files on cases in which there was a documented consumer complaint. But the OCA insisted on getting all of the firm’s files and filed an action with the attorney general to get access to the documents.

FJH took the position that since the OCA falls under the Governor’s office, it was unconstitutional for them to request access to litigation files. The firm argued that the judicial branch was governed by the state bar and the executive branch could not govern legal practices.

Judge Ingram agreed. Her ruling noted that the State Bar of Georgia regulates the practice of law and has investigated some of the conduct the state wants to investigate.

Hanna said that his firm does get complaints because of the large volume of cases they work, and that the bar has investigated FJH in the past. But it found no evidence of illegal activity.

An OCA spokesman told the Atlanta Journal-Constitution that the attorney general’s office will appeal the ruling. The state is continuing its investigation but needs the documents demanded and must wait until the Supreme Court rules on the issue, he said. OCA did not get back to insideARM in time for press Friday.

Hanna said that he hopes the case sets a precedent for states’ attorneys general. “The office of the attorney general, when acting on behalf of the executive branch, cannot file actions against law firms,” he said. “I think this is a good case and I hope debt collection law firms take note.”