THE FLORIDA BAR, COMPLAINANT,
v.
HENRY R. BARKSDALE, 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 adopts the referee's findings and recommendations for disciplinary measures against the respondent attorney.
[1] A lawyer who neglects a legal matter entrusted to him violates the Code of Professional Responsibility.
[2] Disciplinary sanctions for attorney misconduct may be imposed consecutively to prior disciplinary sanctions.
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 respondent attorney pleaded guilty to neglecting a legal matter, a violation of the Code of Professional Responsibility. This violation occurred d…
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 Rehabilitation cases and more on FLexlaw
PER CURIAM.
This disciplinary proceeding is before the Court on the complaint of The Florida Bar and the report of the referee. We have jurisdiction. Art. V, § 15, Fla.Const. Neither The Florida Bar nor the respondent, Henry R. Barksdale, has filed a petition for review.
The respondent pleaded guilty to a violation of Code of Professional Responsibility Disciplinary Rule 6-101(A)(3) in that he neglected a legal matter entrusted to him. The referee found that this violation arose during the same time as the events for which respondent has been previously suspended for two years by this Court in The Florida Bar v. Barksdale, 394 So. 2d 114 (Fla.1981). The referee then recommended the following:
1. That the Respondent, Henry R. Barksdale, be found 'guilty by the Court of misconduct justifying disciplinary measures.
2. That the Respondent be suspended from the practice of law for an additional period of thirty (30) days and at the end of said term of suspension be reinstated upon proof of rehabilitation and restitution as required in the previous suspension order and further upon proof that he has satisfied the further requirement of this recommendation.
3. That upon reinstatement, Respondent be placed on three (3) years concurrent probation, conditioned upon his compliance with all Integration Rules of The Florida Bar and upon his total abstinence from alcoholic beverages.
4. That the Respondent pay the costs of these proceedings in the sum of $948.91 within six (6) days from the date of the Court’s judgment herein.
5. That the Respondent serve twenty (20) hours community time as a volunteer in the Advocate’s Program and that he provide evidence of satisfactory completion of that requirement of this Referee, to the Court, and to The Florida Bar. We approve the findings and recommendation of the referee and adopt the same as the judgment of this Court.
The thirty-day suspension shall run consecutively to the previous two-year suspension.
It is so ordered.
ADKINS, Acting C.J., and BOYD, OVERTON, McDonald and EHRLICH, JJ., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By (16 total)
-
Snyder v. Bd. OF Cnty. Comm'rs OF Brevard Cnty., 595 So. 2d 65 (Fla. 5th DCA 1991)…ication of an existing general legislated policy (i.e., a general rule of law) to a particular parcel of land and to owners whose property interests were easily identifiable.31 In a subsequent case, Florida [*75] Land, Co. v. City of Winter Springs, 427 So. 2d 170 (Fla.1983), the supreme court rejected the position that the rezoning in that case was a quasi-judicial act but the holding in that case must also be considered with regard to the facts and issues there involved. In Florida Land Co., the “rezoning”…
-
Hirt v. Polk Cnty. Bd. OF Cnty. Comm'rs & Jack M. Watkins, Sr., 578 So. 2d 415 (Fla. 2d DCA 1991)…he nature of Hirt’s challenge, he acknowledges that he is not contesting the validity or applicability of the underlying ordinance. If he were, the proper method for review would be injunc-tive relief. See Florida Land Co. v. City of Winter Springs, 427 So. 2d 170, 174 (Fla.1983); City of Melbourne v. Hess Realty Corp., 575 So. 2d 774 (Fla. 5th DCA 1991). The planned unit development concept varies from the traditional concept of zoning classifications. It permits a flexible approach to the regulation of lan…
-
The Izaak Walton League OF Am. v. Monroe Cnty. & Windley Key, Ltd., 448 So. 2d 1170 (Fla. 3d DCA 1984)…ocka involved what was at least arguably a quasi-judicial question, that of determining the validity of charges against a city employee, this case concerns the supremely legislative function of zoning, Florida Land Company v. City of Winter Springs, 427 So. 2d 170, 174 (Fla.1983).5 Accordingly, the cases have almost unanimously declined even to consider disqualification of a responsible official merely because he has expressed, or even committed, himself publicly on a zoning issue before a formal vote has ta…
Previewing 3 of 16 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceAuthorities Cited
- THE Florida BAR v. Barksdale, 394 So. 2d 114 (Fla. 1981)