The Georgia Court of Appeals has upheld a contempt ruling against attorney Serge Jerome, Jr. for failing to appear in court on time. The court found that Jerome's actions disrupted court proceedings and interfered with the orderly administration of justice. This ruling is significant as it reinforces the authority of courts to hold attorneys accountable for their conduct in court.
Jerome's case began when he was representing a client in a criminal matter in the State Court of Coweta County. On September 16, 2025, he filed a motion requesting a continuance for a motions hearing scheduled for September 22. The trial court denied this motion, noting that Jerome had not provided sufficient evidence of a scheduling conflict. The court then specially set the hearing for September 23 at 2:00 p.m.
On the day of the hearing, Jerome informed the prosecutor via email that he was in DeKalb County for another trial and would not be able to attend the motions hearing. Despite this, he did not respond to a follow-up email from the prosecutor or notify the court of his absence. The trial court subsequently found Jerome's failure to appear and communicate with the court to be direct contempt, leading to a contempt order issued on September 24.
After a series of missed appearances and late filings, Jerome was scheduled for a show cause hearing on October 22, 2025, but he arrived late. The trial court held him in contempt for failing to appear on time and imposed a sanction of two days in jail or a $500 fine. Jerome appealed this decision, arguing that the trial court had violated his due process rights and that there was insufficient evidence to support the contempt finding.
The court ruled that Jerome's arguments lacked merit. It stated, "To hold a party in contempt, a trial court must find that the party willfully disobeyed a court order." The judges emphasized that the trial court had the discretion to determine whether Jerome's actions constituted contempt and that the evidence supported the trial court's decision.
In its ruling, the court noted that Jerome had been given the opportunity to explain his tardiness during the hearing. The judges found that the trial court had properly exercised its authority and that Jerome's failure to appear was willful. The court cited previous cases affirming that attorneys can be held in direct contempt for failing to appear in court.
Furthermore, the court dismissed Jerome's claims of discriminatory treatment, stating that there was no evidence to support his allegations. The judges admonished Jerome for making unfounded accusations against the trial court and referred him to the State Bar of Georgia for possible disciplinary action. The ruling reinforces the importance of attorneys adhering to court schedules and the consequences of failing to do so.
This ruling has implications for attorneys practicing in Georgia, as it underscores the courts' commitment to maintaining order in the courtroom. The decision may serve as a warning to other attorneys about the potential consequences of failing to comply with court orders and procedures.
Moving forward, Jerome has the option to appeal this decision to the Georgia Supreme Court. However, details on whether he plans to pursue further action were not available in the court filing. The case highlights the ongoing scrutiny of attorney conduct in Georgia's legal system and the expectations placed on legal professionals to uphold the integrity of the court.