The Florida Bar v. Belleville case brief summary
591 So.2d 170
SYNOPSIS: Complainant Florida Bar sought review of a referee's report recommending that respondent attorney be found not guilty of alleged ethical violations.
OVERVIEW: Respondent attorney was retained as counsel for buyer. Although buyer and seller had negotiated only for the sale of an apartment building, respondent drafted documents to sell seller's apartment building and residence. It was unclear whether respondent knowingly participated in his client's activities or merely followed buyer's instructions without question. The documents overwhelmingly favored buyer. Respondent was charged with ethical violations. The referee recommended no discipline on a conclusion that respondent attorney owed no attorney-client obligation to seller. Complainant Florida Bar sought review.
HOLDING:
Based on the facts, the court could not accept the referee's recommendation concerning guilt and punishment. The court held that respondent was under an ethical obligation to explain to seller that respondent was representing an adverse interest.
ANALYSIS:
-The court further held that when the transaction was as one-sided as that in the present case, respondent was under an ethical duty to make sure that seller understood the possible detrimental effect of the transaction.
-The court held that respondent be suspended from the practice of law for a period of 30 days.
OUTCOME: The court found that respondent attorney was guilty of ethical violations. The court held that respondent had an ethical obligation to explain to an unrepresented seller that respondent was representing an adverse interest and to assure that seller understood the effect of the transaction.
---
Interested in learning how to get the top grades in your law school classes? Want to learn how to study smarter than your competition? Interested in transferring to a high ranked school?
591 So.2d 170
SYNOPSIS: Complainant Florida Bar sought review of a referee's report recommending that respondent attorney be found not guilty of alleged ethical violations.
OVERVIEW: Respondent attorney was retained as counsel for buyer. Although buyer and seller had negotiated only for the sale of an apartment building, respondent drafted documents to sell seller's apartment building and residence. It was unclear whether respondent knowingly participated in his client's activities or merely followed buyer's instructions without question. The documents overwhelmingly favored buyer. Respondent was charged with ethical violations. The referee recommended no discipline on a conclusion that respondent attorney owed no attorney-client obligation to seller. Complainant Florida Bar sought review.
HOLDING:
Based on the facts, the court could not accept the referee's recommendation concerning guilt and punishment. The court held that respondent was under an ethical obligation to explain to seller that respondent was representing an adverse interest.
ANALYSIS:
-The court further held that when the transaction was as one-sided as that in the present case, respondent was under an ethical duty to make sure that seller understood the possible detrimental effect of the transaction.
-The court held that respondent be suspended from the practice of law for a period of 30 days.
OUTCOME: The court found that respondent attorney was guilty of ethical violations. The court held that respondent had an ethical obligation to explain to an unrepresented seller that respondent was representing an adverse interest and to assure that seller understood the effect of the transaction.
---
Interested in learning how to get the top grades in your law school classes? Want to learn how to study smarter than your competition? Interested in transferring to a high ranked school?
-->
No comments:
Post a Comment