The Florida Bar v. Dykes
| Decision Date | 15 October 1987 |
| Docket Number | No. 70190,70190 |
| Citation | 513 So.2d 1055,12 Fla. L. Weekly 525 |
| Parties | 12 Fla. L. Weekly 525 THE FLORIDA BAR, Complainant, v. Ronald L. DYKES, Respondent. |
| Court | Florida Supreme Court |
John F. Harkness, Jr., Executive Director, and John T. Berry, Staff Counsel, Tallahassee, and David G. McGunegle, Bar Counsel, Orlando, for complainant.
No appearance for respondent.
This Florida Bar disciplinary proceeding is before the Court for consideration of the referee's report finding professional misconduct and recommending that respondent Ronald L. Dykes be disbarred. No petition for review has been filed. We consider the report pursuant to rule 3-7.6 of the Rules Regulating The Florida Bar.
On June 10, 1985, respondent was suspended from the practice of law for six months. The Florida Bar v. Dykes, 469 So.2d 741 (Fla.1985). By the terms of the suspension, respondent was to be required to prove rehabilitation before being reinstated to active membership in The Florida Bar. He has not been reinstated.
The Florida Bar's complaint contained four counts. On count one, the referee found that respondent had failed to notify a client of his suspension as was required by the former Florida Bar Integration Rule, article XI, rule 11.10(7). He also failed to include the client on the list of pending matters furnished to the Bar upon his suspension. The referee found respondent had violated the foregoing rule and also article XI, rule 11.02(3)(a) () and the former Code of Professional Responsibility, Disciplinary Rules 1-102(A)(4) () and 1-102(A)(6) ().
On count two, the referee found that respondent acted as personal representative for an estate after his suspension and without the service of another attorney as counsel for the estate. He notified neither the client nor the court of his suspension and failed to include the client in the affidavit provided to the Bar upon suspension. The referee found violations of rules 11.10(7) and 11.02(3)(a) and Disciplinary Rules 1-102(A)(4) and 1-102(A)(6).
On count three, the referee found that after his suspension, respondent had communications with a client regarding the client's pending legal business. Although the client knew about the suspension, respondent failed to provide the notice contemplated by rule 11.10(7). The referee found that the rule was violated. He also found respondent guilty of violating Disciplinary Rule 1-102(A)(6).
On count four the referee found that respondent misappropriated the funds of an estate with the intent to convert the funds to his own use. The referee found that respondent had also willfully disregarded a court order to turn over the assets of the estate to a successor personal representative. The referee concluded that respondent had violated Disciplinary Rules 1-102(A)(3) () and 1-102(A)(4) (). These superseded disciplinary rules correspond to Rules of Professional Conduct 4-8.4(b)...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
The Florida Bar v. Simring
...to disbar a lawyer who is found guilty of violating its orders. The Fla. Bar v. Bauman, 558 So.2d 994 (Fla.1990); The Fla. Bar v. Dykes, 513 So.2d 1055 (Fla.1987). As this Court stated in We can think of no person less likely to be rehabilitated than someone like respondent, who wilfully, d......
-
The Florida Bar v. Weisser, 87035.
...disbarred a judge for ten years where the judge accepted bribes and committed other acts of misconduct. Finally, in Florida Bar v. Dykes, 513 So.2d 1055, 1056 (Fla.1987), this Court disbarred an attorney without leave to apply for readmission for ten years where the attorney (1) failed to n......
- The Florida Bar v. Taylor, s. 81379
- The Florida Bar v. Attias