THE FLORIDA BAR, COMPLAINANT,
v.
IRVIN R. SHUPACK, 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 findings of fact and recommendation of discipline, suspending the respondent attorney for thirty days.
The Florida Bar charged respondent attorney with violations of the Bar's rules. The referee found the respondent guilty of one charge, violating Disci…
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 Disciplinary Rule 1-102(A)(4) cases and more on FLexlaw
PER CURIAM.
This attorney-discipline proceeding is before us on the complaint of The Florida Bar and the report of the referee. Neither party has sought review of the referee’s report. We have jurisdiction. Art. V, § 15, Fla. Const. The Florida Bar charged respondent with violations of The Florida Bar Integration Rule and Disciplinary Rules of The Florida Bar Code of Professional Responsibility. The referee recommended that respondent be found guilty of one of two charges and concluded that respondent had violated Disciplinary Rule 1-102(A)(4). The referee recommended that respondent be suspended from the practice of law for a period of thirty days with automatic reinstatement at the end of the period of suspension.
We approve the referee’s findings of fact and recommendation of discipline. Respondent is suspended from the practice of law for a period of thirty days, effective thirty days from the date of this opinion, giving him time to protect the interests of his clients. Respondent shall be automatically reinstated at the end of the period of suspension. Costs of these proceedings in the amount of $1,110.66 shall be assessed against respondent.
It is so ordered.
ADKINS, Acting C.J., and OVERTON, McDONALD, EHRLICH and SHAW, JJ.,
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
THE Florida BAR v. Shupack, 523 So. 2d 1139 (Fla. 1988)…reinstatement. The Bar argues that the referee should have imposed a suspension of six months on Shupack because, in light of Shupack’s prior disciplinary history for similar misconduct, a harsher punishment is in order. The Florida Bar v. Shupack, 453 So. 2d 404 (Fla.1984) (thirty day suspension imposed for violating Disciplinary Rule 1-102(A)(4)). Although we agree the prior history of a respondent should be considered when determining the appropriate punishment for present misconduct, we reject the Bar’s…