Florida Bar v. Dunagan

509 So. 2d 291, 12 Fla. L. Weekly 330, 1987 Fla. LEXIS 2033
CourtSupreme Court of Florida
DecidedJuly 2, 1987
DocketNo. 69592
StatusPublished
Cited by3 cases

This text of 509 So. 2d 291 (Florida Bar v. Dunagan) 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. Dunagan, 509 So. 2d 291, 12 Fla. L. Weekly 330, 1987 Fla. LEXIS 2033 (Fla. 1987).

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

This disciplinary proceeding is before the Court for consideration of a referee’s report filed pursuant to Rule 3-7.6 of the Rules Regulating The Florida Bar.

Upon trial of the charges made in a complaint filed by The Florida Bar, the referee found that respondent Walter B. Dunagan had entered into a business transaction with his client without advising the client to obtain independent legal counsel. The referee recommended that respondent be found guilty of violating Disciplinary Rule 5-104(A) of the former Florida Bar Code of Professional Responsibility. D.R. 5-104(A) provides: “A lawyer shall not enter into a business transaction with a client if they have differing interests therein and if the client expects the lawyer to exercise his professional judgment therein for the protection of the client, unless the client has consented after full disclosure.” The referee recommended a public reprimand and probation for six months.

Neither party seeks review of the referee’s report. Therefore the referee’s findings of fact are deemed conclusive and the recommended disciplinary measures are adopted. Rules Regulating The Florida Bar, Rule 3-7.6(c)(6).

Accordingly, by the publication of this order we hereby reprimand attorney Walter B. Dunagan and place him on probation for six months.

The Florida Bar’s costs in this proceeding are assessed against the respondent. Judgment is entered against Walter B. Du-nagan in the amount of $1572.89, 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

Related

The Florida Bar v. Dunagan
731 So. 2d 1237 (Supreme Court of Florida, 1999)
The Florida Bar v. Kramer
593 So. 2d 1040 (Supreme Court of Florida, 1992)
Florida Bar v. Dunagan
565 So. 2d 1327 (Supreme Court of Florida, 1990)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
509 So. 2d 291, 12 Fla. L. Weekly 330, 1987 Fla. LEXIS 2033, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/florida-bar-v-dunagan-fla-1987.