THE FLORIDA BAR, COMPLAINANT,
v.
HOMER ALLEN ROSS, 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 Court disbars the respondent attorney based on findings of serious misconduct, including conversion of client funds and violations of professional responsibility rules.
[1] An attorney's conversion of client funds to personal use constitutes serious misconduct violating rules of professional responsibility.
[2] An attorney's failure to apply client funds to their intended purposes and conversion of those funds to personal use constitutes serious misconduct.
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 intelligenceThe Florida Bar filed a complaint against the respondent attorney alleging multiple violations of professional conduct rules. A referee found serious …
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 Conversion Of Client Funds cases and more on FLexlaw
PER CURIAM.
This attorney-discipline proceeding is before the Court on the complaint of The Florida Bar and the report of a referee. The referee found serious misconduct and recommended disbarment. Neither party has petitioned for review of the referee’s findings or recommendation. We disbar the respondent and assess against him the costs incurred by The Florida Bar in this proceeding.
The Florida Bar brought its complaint in four counts. A referee was assigned and held a hearing. Respondent received notice pursuant to article XI, rule 11.13(2) of the Integration Rule of The Florida Bar. Respondent did not personally attend the hearing but was represented there by counsel.
With regard to count one, the referee found that respondent made a false statement in accounting to a client for the disposition of funds held in trust and converted $75,723.90 of the client’s money to his own use, thereby violating rule 11.02 of the Integration Rule and numerous provisions of the Code of Professional Responsibility.
On count two, the referee found that respondent received $8,000 from clients in a matter unrelated to count one, failed to apply the money to its intended purposes, and converted it to his own use, thereby again violating the Integration Rule and the Code.
Regarding count three, the referee found, based on a Bar audit of respondent’s trust account, that respondent had used funds held in trust to meet his personal obligations in violation of the Integration Rule and the Code.
On count four, the referee found that respondent violated the Integration Rule and the Code by maintaining his trust account with inaccurate and incomplete reconciliations.
We approve and adopt the referee’s findings of fact and the recommended discipline. Respondent is disbarred from the practice of law, effective immediately. We assess the costs of these proceedings against respondent in the amount of $1,084.69.
It is so ordered.
ALDERMAN, C. J., and BOYD, OVER-TON, McDonald and EHRLICH, JJ., concur.