Florida Bar v. Day

Supreme Court of Florida

Florida Bar v. Day

520 So. 2d 581, 13 Fla. L. Weekly 171, 1988 Fla. LEXIS 304, 1988 WL 18697

CourtSupreme Court of Florida

DecidedMarch 3, 1988

DocketNo. 70828

StatusPublished

This text of 520 So. 2d 581 (Florida Bar v. Day) 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. Day, 520 So. 2d 581, 13 Fla. L. Weekly 171, 1988 Fla. LEXIS 304, 1988 WL 18697 (Fla. 1988).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

In this uncontested bar discipline proceeding, the referee found that the respondent attorney, Karen S. Day, while involved in a legal support services company, notarized numerous affidavits without requiring the affiants to personally appear before her. The referee recommended that respondent be found guilty of violating the former Code of Professional Responsibility, Disciplinary Rules 1-102(A)(4) (conduct involving dishonesty, fraud, deceit, or misrepresentation), 1-102(A)(5) (conduct prejudicial to the administration of justice), and 1-102(A)(6) (conduct adversely reflecting on fitness to practice law), and that her conduct constituted a violation of the former Integration Rule of The Florida Bar, article XI, rule 11.02(3)(a) (conduct contrary to honesty, justice, or good morals).

The referee recommended that the respondent receive a public reprimand, to be administered by the publication of this Court’s order. We approve the referee’s report and hereby reprimand attorney Karen S. Day for professional misconduct.

The costs of this proceeding are taxed against the respondent. Judgment is entered against Karen S. Day for costs in the amount of $931.45, for which sum let execution issue.

It is so ordered.

MCDONALD, C.J., and OVERTON, EHRLICH, SHAW, BARKETT, GRIMES and KOGAN, JJ., concur.

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

PER CURIAM.

In this uncontested bar discipline proceeding, the referee found that the respondent attorney, Karen S. Day, while involved in a legal support services company, notarized numerous affidavits without requiring the affiants to personally appear before her. The referee recommended that respondent be found guilty of violating the former Code of Professional Responsibility, Disciplinary Rules 1-102(A)(4) (conduct involving dishonesty, fraud, deceit, or misrepresentation), 1-102(A)(5) (conduct prejudicial to the administration of justice), and 1-102(A)(6) (conduct adversely reflecting on fitness to practice law), and that her conduct constituted a violation of the former Integration Rule of The Florida Bar, article XI, rule 11.02(3)(a) (conduct contrary to honesty, justice, or good morals).

The referee recommended that the respondent receive a public reprimand, to be administered by the publication of this Court’s order. We approve the referee’s report and hereby reprimand attorney Karen S. Day for professional misconduct.

The costs of this proceeding are taxed against the respondent. Judgment is entered against Karen S. Day for costs in the amount of $931.45, for which sum let execution issue.

It is so ordered.

MCDONALD, C.J., and OVERTON, EHRLICH, SHAW, BARKETT, GRIMES and KOGAN, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

520 So. 2d 581, 13 Fla. L. Weekly 171, 1988 Fla. LEXIS 304, 1988 WL 18697, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/florida-bar-v-day-fla-1988.