Florida Bar v. Friedman

Supreme Court of Florida

Florida Bar v. Friedman

506 So. 2d 409, 12 Fla. L. Weekly 218, 1987 Fla. LEXIS 1833

CourtSupreme Court of Florida

DecidedApril 30, 1987

DocketNo. 69119

StatusPublished

This text of 506 So. 2d 409 (Florida Bar v. Friedman) 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. Friedman, 506 So. 2d 409, 12 Fla. L. Weekly 218, 1987 Fla. LEXIS 1833 (Fla. 1987).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

This disciplinary proceeding is before us on complaint of The Florida Bar and the report of the referee. We have jurisdiction. Art. V, § 15, Fla. Const.

The referee recommends that respondent be found guilty of violating Disciplinary Rules 1-102(A)(3) (a lawyer shall not engage in illegal conduct involving moral turpitude); 1-102(A)(4) (a lawyer shall not engage in conduct involving dishonesty, fraud, deceit, or misrepresentation); 1-102(A)(6) (a lawyer shall not engage in any conduct that adversely reflects on his fitness to practice law), and Rule 11.02(3)(a) of the Integration Rule of The Florida Bar. The referee recommended a two-year suspension and passage of the ethics portion of the bar examination. We requested supplemental briefs concerning the appropriate discipline.

After review of the supplemental briefs, we approve the referee’s findings and recommendations. Accordingly, respondent is suspended for two years, effective immediately, and must provide proof of rehabilitation, including satisfactory completion of the ethics portion of the exam. Judgment for costs in the amount of $150 is hereby entered against respondent, 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.

This disciplinary proceeding is before us on complaint of The Florida Bar and the report of the referee. We have jurisdiction. Art. V, § 15, Fla. Const.

The referee recommends that respondent be found guilty of violating Disciplinary Rules 1-102(A)(3) (a lawyer shall not engage in illegal conduct involving moral turpitude); 1-102(A)(4) (a lawyer shall not engage in conduct involving dishonesty, fraud, deceit, or misrepresentation); 1-102(A)(6) (a lawyer shall not engage in any conduct that adversely reflects on his fitness to practice law), and Rule 11.02(3)(a) of the Integration Rule of The Florida Bar. The referee recommended a two-year suspension and passage of the ethics portion of the bar examination. We requested supplemental briefs concerning the appropriate discipline.

After review of the supplemental briefs, we approve the referee’s findings and recommendations. Accordingly, respondent is suspended for two years, effective immediately, and must provide proof of rehabilitation, including satisfactory completion of the ethics portion of the exam. Judgment for costs in the amount of $150 is hereby entered against respondent, 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)

506 So. 2d 409, 12 Fla. L. Weekly 218, 1987 Fla. LEXIS 1833, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/florida-bar-v-friedman-fla-1987.