THE FLORIDA BAR, COMPLAINANT,
v.
ROBERT M. SEGAL, 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 Robert M. Segal for multiple violations of professional responsibility rules across three consolidated cases. The Florida Supreme Court approved the referee's findings and disbarred Segal from practicing law in Florida, ordering restitution and costs.
Segal was found guilty of violating multiple disciplinary rules across three counts, including conduct prejudicial to the administration of justice, dishonesty and fraud, neglect of legal matters, failure to carry out employment contracts, and failure to return client funds. The Court approved the referee's recommendation to disbar Segal from the practice of law in Florida, order restitution of a $2,500 retainer to Signs, Inc. of Florida, and assess costs.
[1] Engaging in conduct prejudicial to the administration of justice constitutes a violation of professional responsibility rules.
[2] Conduct that adversely reflects on a lawyer's fitness to practice law is a violation of professional responsibility rules.
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“Having carefully reviewed the record, we approve the findings and recommendations of the referee.”
The Court's adoption of the referee's findings of guilt and recommendation for disbarment.
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceSegal was charged with multiple counts of professional misconduct across three consolidated cases. The violations included neglecting legal matters en…
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 Integration Rule Of The Florida Bar cases and more on FLexlaw
PER CURIAM.
These disciplinary proceedings by The Florida Bar against Robert M. Segal, a member of The Florida Bar, are presently before us on complaints of The Florida Bar and report of referee. The referee’s report and record have been filed with this Court pursuant to Florida Bar Integration Rule, article XI, Rule 11.06(9)(b). No petition for review has been filed.
Having considered the pleadings and evidence, the referee found as follows:
Case No. 64,338
As to Count I
I recommend that the respondent be found guilty and specifically that he be found guilty of violating the following Integration Rules of The Florida Bar and/or Disciplinary Rules of the Code of Professional Responsibility, to wit:
a. DR 1-102(A)(5) for engaging in conduct prejudicial to the administration of justice;
b. DR 1-102(A)(6) for engaging in conduct which adversely reflects on respondent’s fitness to practice law;
c. DR 6-101(A)(3) for neglecting a legal matter entrusted to him by a client; and d. DR 7-101(A)(2) by failing to carry out a contract of employment entered into with a client for professional services. As to Count II
I recommend that respondent be found guilty and specifically that he be found guilty of violating the following Integration Rules of The Florida Bar and/or Disciplinary Rules of the Code of Professional Responsibility, to wit:
a. DR 1-102(A)(5) for conduct prejudicial to the administration of justice; and b. DR 1-102(A)(6) for conduct which adversely reflects on respondent’s fitness to practice law.
As to Count III
b. DR 1-102(A)(6) for conduct which adversely reflects on respondent’s fitness to practice law by falsely representing to his client that a suit had been filed on his behalf;
c. DR 6-101(A)(3) for neglecting a legal matter entrusted to respondent by a client;
d. DR 7-101(A)(2) for failing to carry out a contract of employment entered into with a client; and e. DR 9-102(B)(4) for failing to promptly pay to his client as requested by him funds in the possession of the respondent which the client is entitled to receive.
Case No. 64,526
As to Count I
I recommend that the respondent be found guilty and specifically that he be found guilty of violating the following Integration Rules of The Florida Bar and/or Disciplinary Rules of the Code of Professional Responsibility, to wit:
a. DR 6-101(A)(3) by neglecting a legal matter entrusted to him by a client.
The referee considered the nature and number of the offenses charged in these consolidated cases and respondent’s previous disciplinary convictions and recommended that he be disbarred from the practice of law in the State of Florida, that he be ordered to reimburse to Signs, Inc. of Florida the $2,500 retainer which he accepted to represent the corporation, and that he pay all costs of these disciplinary proceedings.
Having carefully reviewed the record, we approve the findings and recommendations of the referee.
Accordingly, respondent, Robert M. Se-gal, is hereby disbarred from the practice of law in the State of Florida effective immediately.*
Judgment for costs in the amount of $879.19 is hereby entered against respondent, for which let execution issue.
It is so ordered.
ADKINS, Acting C.J., and OVERTON, ALDERMAN, McDONALD and SHAW, JJ., concur. *
Respondent is currently under suspension from the practice of law by order of this Court. The Fla. Bar v. Segal, 441 So. 2d 624 (Fla.1983).
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
THE Florida BAR v. Batista, 846 So. 2d 479 (Fla. 2003)…be treated as an aggravating factor and that it could be utilized to enhance Batista’s discipline. [*485] The Bar relies on Florida Bar v. Agar, 394 So. 2d 405, 406 (Fla.1980), Florida Bar v. Gunther, 400 So. 2d 968 (Fla.1981), Florida Bar v. Segal, 462 So. 2d 1091 (Fla.1985), and Florida Bar v. Page, 475 So. 2d 1236 (Fla.1985), for the proposition that disbarment is appropriate for Batista’s conduct in contacting the witnesses. We disagree and find that those cases are distinguishable as involving more egregi…
-
THE Florida BAR v. Segal, 466 So. 2d 214 (Fla. 1985)…imburse Ms. Batts the sum of $500.00 and Mr. Mack the sum of $650.00. Having carefully reviewed the record, we approve the findings and recommendations of the referee. Respondent having been disbarred by order of this Court dated January 24, 1985, 462 So. 2d 1091, he may not seek reinstatement, pursuant to article XI, Rule 11.10(5) of the Integration Rule of The Florida Bar, for three years from January 24, 1985. Respondent is further ordered to reimburse Ms. Batts the sum of $500.00 and Mr. Mack the sum of…
Authorities Cited
- THE Florida BAR v. Segal, 441 So. 2d 624 (Fla. 1983)