Florida Bar v. Kinner

Supreme Court of Florida

Florida Bar v. Kinner

469 So. 2d 131, 10 Fla. L. Weekly 275, 1985 Fla. LEXIS 3324

CourtSupreme Court of Florida

DecidedMay 9, 1985

DocketNo. 66279

StatusPublished

This text of 469 So. 2d 131 (Florida Bar v. Kinner) 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. Kinner, 469 So. 2d 131, 10 Fla. L. Weekly 275, 1985 Fla. LEXIS 3324 (Fla. 1985).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

This attorney-discipline matter is before us on the complaint of The Florida Bar, the report of the referee, and the respondent’s conditional guilty plea for consent judgment.

* In a five-count complaint, the Bar charged respondent with improper conduct in his representation of sixteen different clients and with the misappropriation of more than $30,000.

Neither party contests the referee’s report, in which the referee recommended that respondent be found guilty of violating Disciplinary Rule 1-102(A)(4) of The Florida Bar Code of Professional Responsibility (conducting involving dishonesty, fraud, deceit, or misrepresentation); D.R. 1-102(A)(6) (conduct which adversely reflects on fitness to practice law); D.R. 2-106(A) (entering into agreement for, charging, or collecting an illegal or excessive fee); D.R. 2-110(A)(3) (failure to properly refund unearned fees); D.R. 6-101(A)(3) (neglect of legal matter); D.R. 7-101(A)(l) (failure to seek the lawful objectives of client); D.R. 7-101(A)(2) (failure to carry out a contract of employment); D.R. 7-101(A)(3) (intentionally prejudicing client during the course of the professional relationship); D.R. 9-102(B)(4) (failure to promptly pay or deliver on client’s request the client’s funds or properties); and article XI, Rule 11.02(4) of the Integration Rule of The Florida Bar (misapplication of trust funds). The respondent was suspended from the practice of law by this Court on September 22, 1983, for this misconduct. The referee recommended that respondent be disbarred from the practice of law in Florida, that he be allowed to apply for readmission three years from September 22, 1983, and that respondent be required to make restitution to his former clients.

We approve the referee’s findings of fact and recommendation regarding discipline.

Judgment for costs in the amount of $1,796.39 is hereby entered against respondent, for which let execution issue.

It is so ordered.

OVERTON, Acting C.J., and ALDERMAN, MCDONALD, EHRLICH and SHAW, JJ., concur.

We have jurisdiction. Art. V, § 15, Fla. Const.

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

PER CURIAM.

This attorney-discipline matter is before us on the complaint of The Florida Bar, the report of the referee, and the respondent’s conditional guilty plea for consent judgment.

* In a five-count complaint, the Bar charged respondent with improper conduct in his representation of sixteen different clients and with the misappropriation of more than $30,000.

Neither party contests the referee’s report, in which the referee recommended that respondent be found guilty of violating Disciplinary Rule 1-102(A)(4) of The Florida Bar Code of Professional Responsibility (conducting involving dishonesty, fraud, deceit, or misrepresentation); D.R. 1-102(A)(6) (conduct which adversely reflects on fitness to practice law); D.R. 2-106(A) (entering into agreement for, charging, or collecting an illegal or excessive fee); D.R. 2-110(A)(3) (failure to properly refund unearned fees); D.R. 6-101(A)(3) (neglect of legal matter); D.R. 7-101(A)(l) (failure to seek the lawful objectives of client); D.R. 7-101(A)(2) (failure to carry out a contract of employment); D.R. 7-101(A)(3) (intentionally prejudicing client during the course of the professional relationship); D.R. 9-102(B)(4) (failure to promptly pay or deliver on client’s request the client’s funds or properties); and article XI, Rule 11.02(4) of the Integration Rule of The Florida Bar (misapplication of trust funds). The respondent was suspended from the practice of law by this Court on September 22, 1983, for this misconduct. The referee recommended that respondent be disbarred from the practice of law in Florida, that he be allowed to apply for readmission three years from September 22, 1983, and that respondent be required to make restitution to his former clients.

We approve the referee’s findings of fact and recommendation regarding discipline.

Judgment for costs in the amount of $1,796.39 is hereby entered against respondent, for which let execution issue.

It is so ordered.

OVERTON, Acting C.J., and ALDERMAN, MCDONALD, EHRLICH and SHAW, JJ., concur.

We have jurisdiction. Art. V, § 15, Fla. Const.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

469 So. 2d 131, 10 Fla. L. Weekly 275, 1985 Fla. LEXIS 3324, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/florida-bar-v-kinner-fla-1985.