Florida Bar v. Thomas, 75683
| Decision Date | 13 June 1991 |
| Docket Number | No. 75683,75683 |
| Citation | 582 So.2d 1177 |
| Parties | THE FLORIDA BAR, Complainant, v. David H. THOMAS, Respondent. 582 So.2d 1177, 16 Fla. L. Week. S451 |
| Court | Florida Supreme Court |
John F. Harkness, Jr., Executive Director and John T. Berry, Staff Counsel, Tallahassee, and Thomas E. DeBerg, Asst. Staff Counsel, Tampa, for Complainant.
David H. Thomas, in pro. per.
This matter is before us upon the referee's report recommending that respondent David H. Thomas receive a private reprimand from the Board of Governors and be placed on probation for a period of one year with conditions that he take and pass the multistate test for Professional Responsibility, and attend and complete twenty hours of Continuing Legal Education credits in the area of Civil Procedure. We have jurisdiction. *
The gravamen of the charges against respondent is that he abused the legal system by filing a frivolous lawsuit to punish an attorney for representing clients who opposed the respondent in other legal action. Respondent and his wife were business partners with Henry and SueAnn DeHaan. The deterioration of that relationship resulted in a barrage of grievance complaints and civil suits. The DeHaans filed both a grievance against respondent and a lawsuit alleging misconduct in connection with their joint business. Respondent, in turn, filed a lawsuit against the DeHaans and their lawyer, Robert C. Hill. Respondent's wife also filed a grievance against Hill. The lawsuit against Hill was subsequently dismissed for lack of prosecution.
The referee found that respondent sued Hill to retaliate for Hill's representation of the DeHaans and to get leverage relative to the DeHaans' grievance and lawsuit against him. The referee concluded that respondent followed through on his threat without any factual or legal basis for naming Hill as a codefendant in the lawsuit against the DeHaans.
The referee recommended that respondent be found guilty of violating the following Rules Regulating The Florida Bar: rule 4-3.1 (); rule 4-8.4(d) (); and rule 4-3.2 ().
Respondent challenges the referee's finding of guilt. The Florida Bar cross-petitions for review, arguing that the appropriate discipline should be a ninety-day suspension.
A referee's...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Levine, Matter of
...488 U.S. 999, 109 S.Ct. 774, 102 L.Ed.2d 767 (1989); Florida Bar v. Rosenberg, 387 So.2d 935 (Fla.1980); see also Florida Bar v. Thomas, 582 So.2d 1177 (Fla.1991) (respondent who filed frivolous suit to punish another attorney publicly reprimanded and placed on one-year Although these cases......
- Florida Elks Children's Hosp. v. Stanley
-
Fla. Bar v. Petersen
...convincing evidence that his judgment is incorrect." Fla. Bar v. Tobkin , 944 So.2d 219, 224 (Fla. 2006) (quoting Fla. Bar v. Thomas , 582 So.2d 1177, 1178 (Fla. 1991) ). As discussed below, we defer to the referee's credibility assessments and approve the recommendations as to guilt.Rule V......
-
The Florida Bar v. Batista, SC00-2219.
...credibility should not be overturned absent clear and convincing evidence that his judgment is incorrect."); Florida Bar v. Thomas, 582 So.2d 1177, 1178 (Fla.1991) (same); Florida Bar v. Hayden, 583 So.2d 1016, 1017 (Fla.1991) (where testimony conflicts, referee is charged with responsibili......