THE FLORIDA BAR, COMPLAINANT,
v.
R. WAYNE GRANT, 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 approves the referee's recommendation that the respondent be found guilty of professional misconduct and that a public reprimand is the appropriate discipline.
The respondent was retained to sue for property damage but took no further action after filing suit. The case was dismissed for lack of prosecution, a…
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 Lack Of Prosecution cases and more on FLexlaw
PER CURIAM.
This disciplinary proceeding is before us on the complaint of The Florida Bar and the report of the referee recommending that respondent, R. Wayne Grant, be found guilty of professional misconduct and that he receive a public reprimand. The respondent petitions for review of the referee’s report, requesting that this Court reject the recommendations of the referee. We have jurisdiction. Art. V, § 15, Fla. Const. The referee found that respondent was retained to bring a suit to recover for damage done to the clients’ property. After filing the suit, no further action was taken by respondent on behalf of the clients. After an absence of record activity for almost two years, the court entered a notice of dismissal. Respondent did not respond to this notice and the action was dismissed for lack of prosecution. The referee recommended that respondent be disciplined by public reprimand.
After examining the record and the referee’s report, we approve the referee’s recommendation that respondent be found guilty of violating Disciplinary Rule 6-101(A)(3) of the Code of Professional Responsibility, and we agree with the referee that the appropriate discipline is a public reprimand. We hereby reprimand respondent, R. Wayne Grant, for his professional misconduct, and the publication of this order in Southern Reporter shall serve as respondent’s reprimand. Costs in the amount of $941.57 are hereby taxed against respondent.
It is so ordered.
ALDERMAN, C.J., and OVERTON, MCDONALD and SHAW, JJ., concur. EHRLICH, J., dissents with an opinion.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
THE Florida BAR v. Grant, 514 So. 2d 1075 (Fla. 1987)…omptness and to communicate with the client.” 4.Respondent has on two prior occasions received reprimands for violations in two separate instances of the identical Disciplinary Rule which is the subject of this action. By Orders dated May 19, 1983 [432 So. 2d 53] and March 7, 1985 [465 So. 2d 527] the Supreme Court of Florida issued public reprimands against Respondent for his neglect of legal matters entrusted to him by clients. Although the March 17, 1985 [sic] No. 65,-342 order was issued subsequent to t…1 / 2