THE FLORIDA BAR, COMPLAINANT,
v.
HOWARD O. MORRIS, 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 Bar sought disciplinary action against attorney Howard O. Morris, Jr. for violations including engaging in conduct adversely reflecting on his fitness to practice law, entering into business transactions with clients without proper disclosure and consent, and mishandling trust funds. The Florida Supreme Court adopted the referee's recommendation and suspended Morris from practice for two years and thereafter until rehabilitation.
Morris was found guilty of violations of Disciplinary Rules 1-102(A)(6), 5-104(A), 11.02(3)(a), 11.02(4), and 9-102(B)(4). He was suspended from the practice of law for two years and thereafter until he proved rehabilitation.
[1] An attorney violates disciplinary rules by engaging in conduct that reflects adversely on their fitness to practice law.
[2] An attorney violates disciplinary rules by entering into a business transaction with a client with differing interests without full disclosure and the client's consent.
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“he be found guilty of the following violations of his Oath as an attorney, The Integration Rules of The Florida Bar and Disciplinary Rules of the Code of Professional Responsibility, to-wit: Disciplinary Rule 1-102(A)(6), for engaging in conduct that reflects adversely on his fitness to practice law; and 5-104(A), for entering into a business transaction with a client with differing interest where the client expects the lawyer to exercise his professional judgment for the client's protection and without full disclosure and the client's consent.”
Establishes the core violations found: conduct reflecting adversely on fitness to practice and improper business transactions with clients.
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceMorris engaged in business transactions with clients involving differing interests without full disclosure and client consent. Morris also misused and…
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 Attorney Rehabilitation cases and more on FLexlaw
PER CURIAM.
These disciplinary proceedings are before the Court on complaint of The Florida Bar and report of referee, pursuant to article XI, Rule 11.06(9)(b) of the Integration Rule of The Florida Bar. No petition for review has been filed and we adopt the recommendation of the referee herewith.
The referee recommended findings of guilt and recommendations of discipline as follows:
As to Case No. 63,123
I recommend that the Respondent be found guilty and specifically that he be found guilty of the following violations of his Oath as an attorney, The Integration Rules of The Florida Bar and Disciplinary Rules of the Code of Professional Responsibility, to-wit: Disciplinary Rule 1-102(A)(6), for engaging in conduct that reflects adversely on his fitness to practice law; and 5-104(A), for entering into a business transaction with a client with differing interest where the client expects the lawyer to exercise his professional judgment for the client’s protection and without full disclosure and the client’s consent.
As to Case No. 63,634
I recommend that the Respondent be found guilty and specifically that he be found guilty of the following violations of his Oath as an attorney, The Integration Rules of The Florida Bar and Disciplinary Rules of the Code of Professional Responsibility, to-wit: Disciplinary Rules 11.02(3)(a), and 11.02(4) of Article XI of The Florida Bar Integration Rule for engaging in conduct contrary to honesty, justice or good morals and for misusing and mishandling trust funds; and 9-102(B)(4) for failing to properly handle trust funds.
RECOMMENDATION AS TO DISCIPLINARY MEASURES TO BE APPLIED: I recommend that the Respondent be suspended for a period of two years and thereafter until he shall prove his rehabilitation as provided in Rule 11.-10(4): The suspension to commence at the conclusion of (be consecutive to) the suspension imposed by The Supreme Court of Florida in THE FLORIDA BAR, Complainant, v. HOWARD O. MORRIS, Jr., Respondent, 415 So. 2d 1274 (Fla.1982).
Costs in the amount of $1,215.92 were found to be reasonable and taxed to the respondent.
Therefore, respondent is suspended from the practice of law for two years and thereafter until he shall prove rehabilitation, such suspension to commence immediately upon the completion of the suspension imposed in the earlier disciplinary proceedings. Costs are taxed to the respondent.
It is so ordered.
BOYD, Acting C.J., and OVERTON, MCDONALD and SHAW, JJ., concur. EHRLICH, J., concurs specially with an opinion.
EHRLICH, Judge,
specially concurring.
I concur only because the referee’s report was uncontested. Under other circumstances, I would vote to disbar the respondent. He now stands convicted of three separate violations of trust accounts and of a different, but no less reprehensible, method of stealing from a client. He has failed to keep the Bar notified of his whereabouts, and thus has shown utter disregard for the rules and procedures of the Bar. What further evidence can we require to show that respondent is not fit to be a member of The Florida Bar?