THE FLORIDA BAR, COMPLAINANT,
v.
RALPH S. STERLING, RESPONDENT
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.
The Florida Bar disciplined attorney Ralph S. Sterling for failing to properly hold client deposit funds in trust as required by his fiduciary obligations. Sterling violated the Code of Professional Responsibility by returning a $5,000 deposit check to his client without the seller's consent, leaving the seller unable to collect liquidated damages when the buyer defaulted.
Sterling violated DR 1-102(A)(4)(6) of the Code of Professional Responsibility by knowingly failing to discharge his fiduciary obligation to the seller when he returned the deposit check to his client without consent and subsequently failed to deliver the funds when demanded.
[1] An attorney who holds a deposit in trust for a buyer and seller in a real estate transaction has a fiduciary obligation to both parties.
[2] Returning a deposit held in trust to a client without the consent of the other party violates the attorney's fiduciary duty.
Previewing 2 of 5 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“The Respondent, by returning the $5,000 to his client, knowingly failed to discharge his fiduciary obligation to the seller.”
Establishes the core violation: Sterling's breach of fiduciary duty to the seller by returning trust funds without authorization
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceSterling represented the buyer in a hotel purchase agreement that required a $5,000 deposit to be held in trust and treated as liquidated damages upon…
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.
Explore caselaw by topic → Browse Code Of Professional Responsibility cases and more on FLexlaw
PER CURIAM.
This matter is before the Court on Petition for Approval of Consent Plea for Public Reprimand and Entry of Final Order of Discipline.
On January 21, 1980, The Florida Bar filed its Petition alleging:
1. The Respondent acted as attorney for the buyer in a deposit receipt and contract for the purchase and sale of a hotel.
2. The contract called for a deposit of $5,000 to be held in trust by the Respondent.
3. According to the terms of the contract, the $5,000 was to be treated as liquidated damages in the event of default by the buyer. 4. Shortly after the contract was signed, the Respondent wrote the attorney for the seller, the following:
Please be advised that the undersigned, as attorney for the purchaser above, is holding a check in the amount of $5,000 as and for. the deposit required under the contract for sale and purchase dated September 15, 1976.
5. The Respondent never deposited the check and without the consent of the seller, Respondent returned the uncashed $5,000 check to his client, on or about October 14, 1976.
6. The Respondent, by returning the $5,000 to his client, knowingly failed to discharge his fiduciary obligation to the seller. 7. During October, 1976, the buyer defaulted and the seller requested the $5,000 from the Respondent.
8. The Respondent failed to deliver the $5,000 or the uncashed check to the seller, as he had returned the check to his client, without consent of the seller, in violation of DR 1-102(A)(4)(6) of the Code of Professional Responsibility. 9. During January, 1979, the Board of Governors of The Florida Bar voted to accept the Respondent’s CONSENT PLEA FOR PUBLIC REPRIMAND.
The Petition for Approval of Consent Plea for Public Reprimand and Entry of Final Order of Discipline is granted, and Respondent, Ralph S. Sterling, is hereby disciplined by public reprimand to be published in the Southern Reporter based upon the facts set forth above. The publication of this Opinion shall serve as the public reprimand to Respondent.
Costs in the amount of $201.10 are hereby taxed against the Respondent.
It is so ordered.
ENGLAND, C. J., and ADKINS, BOYD, ALDERMAN and McDONALD, JJ., concur.