In Re AMENDMENTS TO the RULES REGULATING THE FLORIDA BAR (BIENNIAL REPORT)

140 So. 3d 541, 39 Fla. L. Weekly Supp. 359, 2014 WL 2709757, 2014 Fla. LEXIS 1741
CourtSupreme Court of Florida
DecidedMay 29, 2014
DocketSC12-2234
StatusPublished
Cited by4 cases

This text of 140 So. 3d 541 (In Re AMENDMENTS TO the RULES REGULATING THE FLORIDA BAR (BIENNIAL REPORT)) 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
In Re AMENDMENTS TO the RULES REGULATING THE FLORIDA BAR (BIENNIAL REPORT), 140 So. 3d 541, 39 Fla. L. Weekly Supp. 359, 2014 WL 2709757, 2014 Fla. LEXIS 1741 (Fla. 2014).

Opinion

REVISED OPINION

PER CURIAM.

The opinion dated March 27, 2014, is withdrawn and this revised opinion is substituted in its place. 1

*542 This matter is before the Court on the petition of The Florida Bar proposing amendments to the Rules Regulating the Florida Bar. See R. Regulating Fla. Bar 1-12.1. We have jurisdiction. See art. V, § 15, Fla. Const.

The petition, which proposes amendments to existing rules, was approved by the Board of Governors. Formal notice of the proposed amendments was published in the September 1, 2012, issue of The Florida Bar News. The notice was also published on The Florida Bar’s website. The Bar did not receive any comments after the proposals were published for comment. Thereafter, on October 18, 2012, the Bar filed the proposed amendments with the Court. Only one comment was filed with the Court. 2

The Bar petitions to amend Rules Regulating the Florida Bar 1-3.7 (Reinstatement to Membership); 1-7.3 (Membership Fees); 2-7.3 (Creation of Sections and Divisions); 3-4.1 (Notice and Knowledge of Rules; Jurisdiction Over Attorneys of Other States and Foreign Countries); 3-6.1 (Generally); 3-7.1 (Confidentiality); 3-7.2 (Procedures Upon Criminal or Professional Misconduct; Discipline Upon Determination or Judgment of Guilt of Criminal Misconduct; Discipline on Removal From Judicial Office); 3-7.10 (Reinstatement and Readmission Procedures); 4-1.6 (Confidentiality of Information); 4^1.7 (Conflict of Interest; Current Clients); 4-1.9 (Conflict of Interest; Former Client); 4-1.10 (Imputation of Conflicts of Interest; General Rule); 4-2.4 (Lawyer Serving as Third-Party Neutral); 4-3.4 (Fairness to Opposing Party and Counsel); 4-4.2 (Communication With Person Represented by Counsel); 4-6.5 (Voluntary pro bono plan); 4-8.6 (Authorized Business Entities); 5-1.2 (Trust Accounting Records and Procedures); 10-3.1 (Generally); 10-7.2 (Proceedings For Indirect Criminal Contempt); 12-1.2 (Definitions); 12-1.3 (Activities); 12-1.4 (Supervision and limitations); 12-1.5 (Certification); 12-1.6 (Withdrawal of certification); 12-1.7 (Discipline); 14-1.2 (Jurisdiction); 17-1.3 (Activities); 20-2.1 (Generally); 20-3.1 (Requirements for Registration); 20-4.1 (Generally); and 20-6.1 (Generally). After considering the petition, the Court adopts The Florida Bar’s proposals, 3 except as follows.

The Bar proposes amending Rule 3-6.1 (Employment of Certain Lawyers or Former Lawyers; Generally) by adding new subdivision (d)(4) to prohibit suspended attorneys and former attorneys who have been disbarred, or whose disciplinary resignations or revocations have been allowed, from representing clients in administrative proceedings and before administrative agencies which allow nonlawyer agents or “qualified representatives” to represent clients in certain circumstances. Although we appreciate the Bar’s diligent work on this issue, we do not adopt the proposal because we do not have the authority to prohibit a lawyer from doing non-legal work or engaging in lawful activities.

*543 Next, the Bar proposes amending Rule 4r-l .7(d) (Conflict of Interest; Current Clients; Lawyers Related by Blood or Marriage) to clarify that family relationships that must be considered as creating conflicts between lawyers include relationships by blood or marriage. We agree with the proposal, but modify it to also include lawyers who are related by adoption. As we state in the comment to the rule, “The purpose of Rule 4 — 1.7(d) is to prohibit representation of adverse interests, unless informed consent is given by the client, by a lawyer related to another lawyer by blood, adoption, or marriage as a parent, child, sibling, or spouse so as to include those with biological or adopted children and within relations by marriage those who would be considered in-laws and stepchildren and stepparents.” We adopt the rule as modified herein. In addition, we direct the Bar to study the rule further and consider whether the current categories should be broadened beyond parent, child, sibling, and spouse to include other significant relationships.

Accordingly, the Court adopts the amendments to the Rules Regulating the Florida Bar as set forth in the appendix to this opinion. Deletions are indicated by struck-through type, and new language is indicated by underscoring. The comments are offered for explanation and guidance only and are not adopted as an official part of the rules. The amendments to rule 10-3.1(a) shall become effective on July 1, 2015, at 12:01 a.m. The remainder of the amendments shall become effective on June 1, 2014, at 12:01 a.m.

It is so ordered.

POLSTON, C.J., and PARIENTE, LEWIS, QUINCE, LABARGA, and PERRY, JJ., concur. CANADY, J., concurs in result.

APPENDIX

RULES REGULATING THE FLORIDA BAR

CHAPTER 1 GENERAL

1-3. MEMBERSHIP

RULE 1-3.7 REINSTATEMENT TO MEMBERSHIP

(a) Eligibility for Reinstatement. Members who have retired or been delinquent for a period of time not in excess of 5 years are eligible for reinstatement under this rule. Time shallwill be calculated from the day of the retirement or delinquency.

Inactive members may also seek reinstatement under this rule.

(b) Petitions Required. A member seeking reinstatement must file a petition with the executive director setting forth the reason for inactive status, retirement, or delinquency and showing good cause why the petition for reinstatement should be granted. The petition gfaailmust be on a form approved by the board of governors and the petitioner shallwill furnish such information on such form as the board of governors may require. The petition sfaahmust be accompanied by a nonrefundable reinstatement fee of $150 and payment of all arrearages unless adjusted by the executive director with concurrence of the executive committee for good cause shown. Inactive members shall not beare not required to pay the reinstatement fee. No member shallwill be reinstated if, from the petition or from investigation conducted, the petitioner is not of good moral character and morally fit to practice law or if the member is delinquent in-compliance with the continuing legal education or basic skills course requirements.

*544 If the executive director is in doubt as to approval of a petition the executive director may refer the petition to the board of governors for its action. Action of the executive director or board of governors denying a petition for reinstatement may be reviewed upon petition to the Supreme Court of Florida.

(c) Members Who Have Retired or Been Delinquent for Less Than 5 Years, But More Than 3 Years. Members who have retired or been delinquent for less than 5 years, but more than 3 years, shall-must have completed 10 hours- of-continuing legal education courses for each year or portion thereofof a year that the member had retired or was deemed delinquent.

(d) Members Who Have Retired or Been Delinquent for 5 Years or More.

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

Related

Trial Practices, Inc. v. Hahn Loeser & Parks, LLP, etc.
260 So. 3d 167 (Supreme Court of Florida, 2018)
Trial Practices, Inc. v. Hahn Loester & Parks, LLP
228 So. 3d 1184 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 2017)
Trial Practices, Inc. v. Hahn Loeser & Parks, LLP
District Court of Appeal of Florida, 2017

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
140 So. 3d 541, 39 Fla. L. Weekly Supp. 359, 2014 WL 2709757, 2014 Fla. LEXIS 1741, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/in-re-amendments-to-the-rules-regulating-the-florida-bar-biennial-report-fla-2014.