THE FLORIDA BAR, COMPLAINANT,
v.
JAMES C. MCKENZIE, RESPONDENT

Fla. | 1983-01-06
No. 60074
ALDERMAN, C.J., and ADKINS, OVER-TON, MCDONALD and EHRLICH, JJ., concur.
432 So. 2d 566 Florida Supreme Court (1983) Positive Treatment
Cited by 4 cases

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.

Synopsis

The Florida Supreme Court upheld disciplinary findings against attorney James C. McKenzie for professional misconduct, including neglecting a legal matter, wrongfully withholding client funds, and engaging in conduct prejudicial to the administration of justice. The Court imposed a public reprimand as the appropriate discipline.


Holding

McKenzie is guilty of professional misconduct under three provisions of the Florida Bar Code of Professional Responsibility: neglecting a legal matter (DR 6-101(A)(3)), failing to deliver client funds (DR 9-102(B)(4)), and engaging in conduct prejudicial to the administration of justice (DR 1-102(A)(5) and (6)). The appropriate discipline is a public reprimand.


Headnotes

[1] An attorney violates professional responsibility rules by neglecting a legal matter, failing to appear at a hearing without withdrawing or seeking court permission, and b…

[2] An attorney violates professional responsibility rules by failing to deliver funds to a client to which the client is entitled, particularly when withholding funds as a f…

Previewing 2 of 4 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

Key Quotes

“that respondent be found guilty of neglecting a legal matter entrusted to him, in violation of Florida Bar Code of Professional Responsibility DR 6-101(A)(3), because, without withdrawing from his representation or requesting the court's permission to withdraw, he failed to appear on behalf of his client at a hearing, resulting in his being held in contempt of court”

Establishes the first basis for disciplinary finding regarding neglect of legal matters

Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.

Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence

Facts & Procedural History

McKenzie failed to appear on behalf of his client at a hearing without withdrawing from representation or requesting court permission, resulting in co…

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.


Opinion of the Court
PER CURIAM.

PER CURIAM.

This disciplinary proceeding is before us on the complaint of The Florida Bar and the report of the referee recommending that respondent, James C. McKenzie, be found guilty of professional misconduct and that he receive a public reprimand. The Florida Bar and respondent both petitioned for review of the referee’s report, the Bar asking that a three-month suspension be imposed, and the respondent requesting that this Court either find him not guilty of professional misconduct or dismiss the Bar’s charges. We have jurisdiction. Art. V, § 15, Fla. Const. The referee’s findings and conclusions, in summary, are as follows:

1. that respondent be found guilty of neglecting a legal matter entrusted to him, in violation of Florida Bar Code of Professional Responsibility DR 6-101(A)(3), because, without withdrawing from his representation or requesting the court’s permission to withdraw, he failed to appear on behalf of his client at a hearing, resulting in his being held in contempt of court;

2. that respondent be found guilty of failing to deliver to his client all funds to which she was entitled, in violation of Florida Bar Code of Professional Responsibility DR 9-102(B)(4), because he withheld five hundred dollars of his client’s funds as his fee even though there was no agreement that he receive a fee for the particular service performed;

3. that respondent be found guilty of engaging in conduct prejudicial to the administration of justice and adversely reflecting on his fitness to practice law, in violation of Florida Bar Code of Professional Responsibility DR 1-102(A)(5) and (6), because he entered a default judgment on behalf of his client in a dissolution proceeding after having failed to respond to several requests from the out-of-state attorney representing his client’s spouse that respondent allow time for the parties to negotiate a settlement or for the client’s spouse to obtain instate counsel.

The referee recommended that respondent be disciplined by public reprimand.

After examining the record and the referee’s report, we approve the referee’s finding that respondent be found guilty of the identified professional misconduct, and we agree with the referee that the appropriate discipline is a public reprimand. We reprimand respondent, James C. McKenzie, for his professional misconduct, and the publi cation of this order in Southern Reporter shall serve as respondent’s public reprimand. Costs in the amount of $1,718.04 are hereby taxed against respondent.

It is so ordered.

ALDERMAN, C.J., and ADKINS, OVER-TON, MCDONALD and EHRLICH, JJ., concur.


Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus


Citator

Cited By

  • THE Florida BAR v. McKENZIE, 557 So. 2d 31 (Fla. 1990)
    …, we approve the referee’s findings of fact. The recommended discipline is appropriate. McKenzie has two prior disciplinary actions resulting in public reprimands. The Florida Bar v. McKenzie, 442 So. 2d 934 (Fla.1983); The Florida Bar v. McKenzie, 432 So. 2d 566 (Fla.1983). His overall conduct causes disrespect of the legal profession and makes suspect his ability to practice law competently and ethically. We therefore approve the recommended discipline. James C. McKenzie is hereby suspended from the pract…
  • THE Florida BAR v. McKENZIE, 581 So. 2d 53 (Fla. 1991)
    …nce, I find that the Respondent’s testimony at the Final Hearing was less than truthful. Respondent’s testimony was shocking and incredible. The referee noted that McKenzie had a prior disciplinary record, specifically, The Florida Bar v. McKenzie, 432 So. 2d 566 (Fla.1983) (public reprimand); The Florida Bar v. McKenzie, 442 So. 2d 934 (Fla.1983) (public reprimand); and The Florida Bar v. McKenzie, 557 So. 2d 31 (Fla.1990) (suspension from the practice of law for a period of ninety-one days). The referee al…

Full citator, related cases, and AI research tools

Open in FLexlaw