THE FLORIDA BAR, COMPLAINANT,
v.
CHARLES D. STEWART, RESPONDENT

Fla. | 1979-10-18
No. 57344
ENGLAND, C. J., and ADKINS, OVER-TON, SUNDBERG and ALDERMAN, JJ., concur.
376 So. 2d 234 Florida Supreme Court (1979) Positive Treatment
Cited by 2 cases

AI-generated. These summaries, headnotes, and key points are machine-generated and may contain errors or omissions. Always verify against the full opinion text below. Not legal advice.

Synopsis

The Florida Bar sought disciplinary action against attorney Charles D. Stewart for violating professional conduct rules by failing to perform work after accepting a retainer, refusing to refund fees, and misappropriating client trust funds. The Florida Supreme Court approved a conditional guilty plea to discipline and imposed a six-month suspension with two-year probation contingent on rehabilitation.


Holding

The court approved the conditional guilty plea and imposed a six-month suspension from practice, reimbursement of $260 to the client, and two-year probation with conditions including abstinence from alcohol (except with physician consent), quarterly affidavits on alcohol consumption, quarterly case load reports, and file inspection rights for the Bar.


Headnotes

[1] A lawyer violates disciplinary rules by failing to take significant action on behalf of a client after accepting a retainer and refusing to refund the fee.

[2] A lawyer violates disciplinary rules by appropriating client trust funds for personal use without express client permission.

Previewing 2 of 6 headnotes on this case. FLexlaw’s editorially structured points of law — every proposition, pinpointed — are reserved for members.

Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence

Key Quotes

“failing to take any significant action on behalf of a client after accepting a $75 retainer and thereafter refusing to refund any portion of said amount”

Describes the first category of professional misconduct—neglect of a client matter and retention of an unearned fee

Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.

Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence

Facts & Procedural History

Stewart accepted a $75 retainer from one client but failed to take significant action and refused to refund any portion. He also accepted a $100 retai…

The full statement of facts, procedural history, and disposition for this case are member content.

Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence

© FLexlaw, Inc. — AI-generated enrichments are proprietary. All rights reserved.


Opinion of the Court
PER CURIAM.

PER CURIAM.

This matter is before the Court on petition of The Florida Bar for approval of conditional guilty plea for consent judgment and entry of final order of discipline for a six-month suspension and a two-year probation after proof of rehabilitation. The Florida Bar filed its petition alleging that respondent violated Disciplinary Rule 6-101(A)(3) of the Code of Professional Responsibility by failing to take any significant action on behalf of a client after accepting a $75 retainer and thereafter refusing to refund any portion of said amount.

Respondent also violated Disciplinary Rules 6-101(A)(3), 9-102(A), and 9-102(B)(4) by accepting an initial retainer of $100 plus $260 to hold in trust for a client for the purpose of paying a $260 bad check. He thereafter appropriated the $260 towards his fee without the client’s express permission.

The respondent has executed a conditional guilty plea for consent judgment in which he admitted violating Disciplinary Rules 6-101(A)(3), 7-101(A)(2), 9-102(A), and 9-102(B)(4) of the Code of Professional Responsibility and Rules 11.02(3)(a) and 11.-02(4) of the Integration Rule of The Florida Bar. ' As part of the conditional guilty plea, the respondent consents to the following disciplinary measures:

A. Suspension from the practice of law for six months beginning on the date of the Court’s order approving this conditional guilty plea and until he has proved rehabilitation as required by Rule 11.11 of the Integration Rule of The Florida Bar. B. Payment of $260 to John W. Farmer, Jr., representing reimbursement of the trust funds respondent received from Mr. Farmer. C. In the event respondent proves rehabilitation and is reinstated, said reinstatement shall be subject to probation for two years during which time:
(1) Respondent shall drink no alcoholic beverages during probation except with the express written consent of a physician;

(2) Respondent shall arrange for affidavits to be submitted to The Florida Bar on a quarterly basis from a counselor, physician, or other qualified person stating that respondent has not consumed alcoholic beverages during that period;

(3) Respondent shall file sworn quarterly case load reports with The Florida Bar with information as specified in the conditional guilty plea;

(4) Respondent shall open, with one working day’s notice, his case files and his trust account records for inspection by a member of The Florida Bar. The Board of Governors of The Florida Bar approved respondent’s conditional guilty plea for consent judgment and submitted it to this Court for approval.

We grant approval of this conditional guilty plea and direct publication of this opinion in Southern Reporter to serve as a public reprimand to respondent. In addition, costs in the amount of $306 are hereby taxed against respondent.

The suspension shall be effective November 19, 1979, thereby giving respondent time to close out his practice and take the necessary steps to protect his clients. Respondent shall not accept any new business. The filing of a motion for rehearing shall not alter the effective date of this suspension.

It is so ordered.

ENGLAND, C. J., and ADKINS, OVER-TON, SUNDBERG and ALDERMAN, JJ., concur.


Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus


Citator

Cited By

  • THE Florida BAR v. Stewart, 396 So. 2d 170 (Fla. 1981)
    …PER CURIAM. Respondent Charles D. Stewart entered a conditional guilty plea to a complaint filed by The Florida Bar alleging he violated certain disciplinary rules. In our opinion reported at 376 So. 2d 234 (Fla.1979), we suspended Stewart for six months and until he has proved his rehabilitation. This cause is before us on Stewart’s petition for reinstatement and report of the referee. The referee found: After his suspension, Petitioner continued hi…

Full citator, related cases, and AI research tools

Open in FLexlaw