Florida Bar v. Knowles

64 So. 3d 1195, 2011 WL 1587360
Supreme Court of Florida·Decided April 28, 2011·No. No. SC09-403·Published·Cited by 1 cases

Opinions

CANADY, C.J.,

concurring in part and dissenting in part.

I concur in the approval of the referee’s recommendation that the respondent be found guilty, but I dissent from the sanction imposed by the Court.

In addition to other misconduct, the respondent was guilty of threatening to present criminal charges solely to obtain an advantage in a civil matter, conduct which is expressly prohibited by Rule Regulating the Florida Bar 4-3.4(g). Such misconduct by its very nature causes harm to the legal system. The respondent was chargeable with knowledge of the rule prohibiting this misconduct. Florida Standard for Imposing Lawyer Sanctions 7.2 provides that “[s]uspension is appropriate when a lawyer knowingly engages in conduct that is a violation of a duty owed as a professional and causes injury or potential injury to ... the legal system.” Given all of the relevant circumstances, the misconduct here warrants a ninety-day suspension.

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

Florida Bar v. Knowles, 64 So. 3d 1195, 2011 WL 1587360 (Fla. 2011).

64 So. 3d 1195 (Florida Bar v. Knowles) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Florida Bar v. Knowles
99 So. 3d 918 (Supreme Court of Florida, 2012)