THE FLORIDA BAR, COMPLAINANT,
v.
NORMAN T. MITCHELL, 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 Norman T. Mitchell for repeatedly failing to perform legal duties on behalf of clients, misappropriating client funds, and failing to maintain a trust account. The Florida Supreme Court affirmed the referee's recommendation and disbarred Mitchell from practicing law, effective July 21, 1980.
Mitchell violated eleven different provisions of the Code of Professional Responsibility on multiple occasions. His pattern of misconduct—failing to represent clients, misappropriating client funds, and maintaining no trust account—demonstrated a complete disregard for his professional responsibilities. Disbarment was the appropriate sanction due to the totality and frequency of the violations.
[1] A lawyer's failure to file claims, make court appearances, or prosecute appeals on behalf of clients constitutes a violation of disciplinary rules.
[2] A lawyer's failure to return unearned client funds constitutes a violation of disciplinary rules.
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“the totality and frequency of the different complaints evidence to me a reckless and wanton disregard by the respondent for the rights and needs of his clients without any mitigating or exculpatory circumstances”
The referee's rationale for recommending disbarment based on the pattern of violations rather than individual incidents
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceMitchell failed to file claims, make court appearances, or prosecute appeals on behalf of multiple clients. He did not return monies advanced to him b…
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 Violation Of Code Of Professional Responsibility cases and more on FLexlaw
PER CURIAM.
This disciplinary proceeding by The Florida Bar against Norman T. Mitchell, a member of The Florida Bar, is presently before us on complaint of The Florida Bar and Report of Referee. Pursuant to Rule 11.06 of the Integration Rule of The Florida Bar, the referee’s report and record were duly filed with this Court. No petition for review pursuant to Rule 11.09(1), Integration Rule, has been filed.
The referee recommended a finding of guilt as to eleven of the twelve counts charged in the complaint. Specifically he found that in several cases Mitchell failed to file claims, make court appearances, or prosecute appeals on behalf of his clients. On most of these occasions he did not return monies advanced to him by his clients. Additionally, Mitchell apparently never maintained a trust account for his clients. The referee also found that Mitchell knowingly and willfully issued a check without sufficient funds to cover it.
Finding that Mitchell had violated eleven different provisions of the disciplinary rules one or more times, the referee recommended that Mitchell be disbarred from the practice of law. In recommending disbarment the referee commented:
My recommendation is based on the opinion that each of the separate offenses and complaints proven by the Bar, were it be [sic] an isolated incident, would perhaps justify only a public reprimand or suspension by the Supreme Court. But the totality and frequency of the different complaints evidence to me a reckless and wanton disregard by the respondent for the rights and needs of his clients without any mitigating or exculpatory circumstances.
A review of the record reflects sufficient evidence to support the referee’s recommendation that the respondent be found guilty of eleven instances of violating the Code of Professional Responsibility. Mitchell’s actions reveal a complete disregard of his responsibilities as a lawyer and as an officer of the court. The public has been seriously harmed by his unprofessional conduct. Having repeatedly failed to adhere to the responsibilities of an attorney without any known mitigating reasons, he should be disbarred.
The findings of the referee and his recommendations are adopted by this Court. Accordingly, Norman T. Mitchell is hereby disbarred from the practice of law. The disbarment shall be effective on July 21, 1980, thereby giving respondent time to close out his practice and take the necessary steps to protect his clients, and it is ordered that respondent shall not accept any new business.
Costs in the amount of $1,633.12 are assessed against him.
It is so ordered.
ADKINS, Acting C. J., and BOYD, OVERTON, ALDERMAN and MCDONALD, JJ., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
THE Florida BAR v. Shoureas, 892 So. 2d 1002 (Fla. 2004)…roceeding that the attorney “agreed to represent and collected legal fees from various clients on various legal matters [in twenty-six cases] but that respondent thereafter failed to take any action on the clients’ behalf’); Florida Bar v. Mitchell, 385 So. 2d 96, 97 (Fla.1980) (noting in an uncontested proceeding that the attorney “failed to file claims [in several cases], make court appearances, or'prosecute appeals on behalf of his clients”). [*1009] A review of our precedent reveals that the sanction of…
-
THE Florida BAR v. Springer, 873 So. 2d 317 (Fla. 2004)…, in pertinent part, of competency, candor, and diligence infractions, as well as the failure to cooperate with the disciplinary investigation, return client property, and maintain trust account and other financial records); Florida Bar v. Mitchell, 385 So. 2d 96, 97 (Fla.1980) (disbarring attorney who failed to file claims, make court appearances, prosecute appeals, maintain a trust account, return monies advanced to him by his clients, and who knowingly and willfully issued a check with insufficient funds)…
-
THE Florida BAR v. Demarco, 601 So. 2d 1197 (Fla. 1992)…conduct. We find the totality of respondent’s conduct warrants that he be disbarred from the practice of law. See The Fla. Bar v. Ribowsky-Cruz, 529 So. 2d 1100 (Fla.1988); The Fla. Bar v. Murray, 489 So. 2d 30 (Fla.1986); The Fla. Bar v. Mitchell, 385 So. 2d 96, 97 (Fla.1980); Florida’s Standards for Imposing Lawyer Sanctions 4.41(a)-(c) (Fla. Bar Bd. Governors 1986). Accordingly, Charles G. DeMarco is hereby disbarred from the practice of law in Florida effective August 3, 1992, allowing him thirty days…