THE FLORIDA BAR, COMPLAINANT,
v.
A. J. RYAN, JR., 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 Supreme Court disciplined attorney A. J. Ryan for allowing a client's statute of limitations to expire, failing to deliver client property, and failing to timely account for escrow funds. The Court suspended Ryan for 30 days followed by one year of probation, imposing a more severe sanction than the referee recommended due to Ryan's prior disciplinary history.
Ryan is found guilty of violating Code of Professional Responsibility Rules 7-101(A)(1), (2), and (3), 9-102(B)(4), 6-101(A)(3), and Canon 9. Ryan is suspended from The Florida Bar for 30 days effective April 20, 1981, followed by one year of probation, with quarterly reporting requirements.
[1] Allowing the statute of limitations to run against a client's cause of action constitutes a violation of professional responsibility rules.
[2] Failing to deliver to a client securities or other property to which the client is entitled is a violation of professional responsibility 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 referee found that respondent Ryan allowed the statute of limitations to run against a client's cause of action, failed to deliver to a client securities or other property to which the client was entitled, and failed to timely account for escrow funds upon a proper request and a circuit court order.”
Establishes the specific misconduct findings by the referee that formed the basis for discipline.
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceThe referee found that respondent Ryan allowed the statute of limitations to run against a client's cause of action, failed to deliver to a client sec…
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 Prior Disciplinary Record cases and more on FLexlaw
PER CURIAM.
This disciplinary proceeding is before us on complaint of The Florida Bar, report of the referee, and petition of The Florida Bar to review the referee’s recommendations. Ryan did not file an answer to the Bar’s review petition.
The referee found that respondent Ryan allowed the statute of limitations to run against a client’s cause of action, failed to deliver to a client securities or other property to which the client was entitled, and failed to timely account for escrow funds upon a proper request and a circuit court order. The referee recommends respondent Ryan be found guilty of violating Code of Professional Responsibility Rules 7-101(A)(1), (2), and (3),1 9-102(B)(4), 6- 101(A)(3), and Canon 9. Upon full review of the record, we adopt and approve the referee’s findings of fact and recommendations of guilty.
For these violations, the referee recommends that we publicly reprimand Ryan and place him on probation for one year. It appears that the referee’s recommendation was based on his belief that Ryan did not have a prior disciplinary record. This belief was mistaken, however, since Ryan had previously been publicly reprimanded by this Court. See The Florida Bar v. Ryan, 352 So. 2d 1174 (Fla.1972). The Florida Bar argues that, in light of Ryan’s past and present misconduct, he should receive a more severe punishment. We agree.
Accordingly, Ryan is hereby suspended from The Florida Bar for a period of thirty (30) days, effective April 20, 1981, allowing him time to close out his practice and to protect his clients’ interests, followed by a one-year probation. Every three months during the probation period. Ryan shall furnish staff counsel to The Florida Bar an inventory of his files and a status report on each file. Costs are taxed against the respondent in the amount of $1,281.14.
It is so ordered.
OVERTON, ENGLAND, ALDERMAN and McDONALD, JJ., concur. BOYD, J., concurs in part and dissents in part with an opinion, with which ADKINS, J., concurs.
. The referee’s report apparently contains a typographical error. The referee finds under count I that Ryan violated Rule 6-101(A)(l), (2), and (3) for allowing the statute of limita tions to run on a client’s cause of action. Under this count, Ryan was charged with violating Rule 7-101(A)(l), (2), and (3).
BOYD, Justice,
concurring in part and dissenting in part.
I would adopt the referee’s recommendation of discipline reprimanding respondent and placing him on probation for one year. The nature of his violations when considered with his long record of private and public service does not warrant suspension.
ADKINS, J., concurs.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
THE Florida BAR v. Bern, 425 So. 2d 526 (Fla. 1982)…iders the respondent’s previous disciplinary history and increases the discipline where appropriate-. See e.g., The Florida Bar v. Leopold, 399 So. 2d 978 (Fla.1981); The Florida Bar v. Greenspahn, 396 So. 2d 182 (Fla.1981); The Florida Bar v. Ryan, 396 So. 2d 181 (Fla.1981); The Florida Bar v. Greenspahn, 386 So. 2d 523 (Fla.1980); The Florida Bar v. Vernell, 374 So. 2d 473 (Fla.1979); The Florida Bar v. Rubin, 362 So. 2d 12, 15 (Fla.1978); and The Florida Bar v. Solomon, 338 So. 2d 818 (Fla.1976). The Court…
Authorities Cited
- THE Florida BAR v. Archibald J. Ryan, Jr., 352 So. 2d 1174 (Fla. 1977)