Florida Bar v. Collier

385 So. 2d 95, 1980 Fla. LEXIS 4279
CourtSupreme Court of Florida
DecidedJune 19, 1980
DocketNo. 58764
StatusPublished
Cited by1 cases

This text of 385 So. 2d 95 (Florida Bar v. Collier) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Supreme Court of Florida primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Florida Bar v. Collier, 385 So. 2d 95, 1980 Fla. LEXIS 4279 (Fla. 1980).

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

This disciplinary proceeding by The Florida Bar against James C. Collier, a member of The Florida Bar, is presently before us on complaint of The Florida Bar and Report of Referee. No petition for review has been filed.

The report of the referee indicates the respondent was extremely dilatory in the administration of an estate and failed to properly comply and respond to orders of [96]*96the circuit judges responsible for the probate division for Orange County.

The referee recommends the following disciplinary measures be imposed:

IV. Recommendation as to Disciplinary measures to be applied: I recommend that Respondent be (A) suspended from the practice of law for a period of 60 days with automatic reinstatement at the end of the period of suspension as provided in Rule 11.10(3); (B) placed on probation for a period of 2 years and while on probation, he report quarterly the status and progress of every probate and guardianship case being handled by him to the Board of Governors of The Florida Bar; and (C) required to pay the costs [$296.75] of this disciplinary proceeding.

We agree with the referee’s conclusion that respondent has violated disciplinary rules 1-102(A)(5), 6-101(A)(3), 7-101(A)(2), and 7-101(A)(3). Respondent is hereby disciplined consistent with the referee’s recommendation. The suspension shall be effective July 21, 1980, thereby giving respondent time to close out his practice and take the necessary steps to protect his clients, and it is ordered that respondent shall not accept any new business.

It is so ordered.

ENGLAND, C. J., and ADKINS, BOYD, OVERTON and ALDERMAN, JJ., concur.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Related

In re the Disciplinary Proceeding against Koehler
628 P.2d 461 (Washington Supreme Court, 1981)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
385 So. 2d 95, 1980 Fla. LEXIS 4279, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/florida-bar-v-collier-fla-1980.