THE FLORIDA BAR, COMPLAINANT,
v.
JOHN MONTGOMERY GREENE, 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.
An attorney-discipline proceeding where the Florida Supreme Court upheld a referee's findings that attorney John Montgomery Greene violated professional responsibility rules by making errors in real estate deeds, neglecting client matters, and overcharging a client. The court approved the recommended discipline of public reprimand, probation, restitution, and corrective filings.
The Court upheld the referee's findings that Greene violated Disciplinary Rules 1-102(A)(6) and 6-101(A)(3), and approved the recommended discipline of public reprimand, one year of probation with quarterly caseload reports, restitution to the client, preparation and recording of corrective deeds, and payment of costs, with a ninety-day suspension imposed if Greene fails to comply within thirty days.
[1] An attorney's failure to correct errors in property descriptions in deeds, failure to prorate taxes, and overcharging a client constitutes conduct adversely reflecting on…
[2] Publication of a judicial opinion in the Southern Reporter can serve as a public reprimand for an attorney.
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“In preparing the deeds, respondent made an error in the description of the property, which was discovered by his client two years later. Respondent was notified and, after several requests, failed to correct the mistakes which remained unerrected as of the time of the referee's hearing.”
Establishes the core violation: Greene's failure to correct deed errors despite client requests over an extended period
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceGreene prepared deeds with property description errors that were discovered by his client two years later. After several requests, Greene failed to 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.
Explore caselaw by topic → Browse Prior Disciplinary Record cases and more on FLexlaw
PER CURIAM.
This attorney-discipline proceeding is before us on the report of the referee and the petition of The Florida Bar for review of the referee’s recommended punishment. We have jurisdiction. Art. V, § 15, Fla. Const. This proceeding arises from respondent’s handling of a real estate transaction. In preparing the deeds, respondent made an error in the description of the property, which was discovered by his client two years later. Respondent was notified and, after several requests, failed to correct the mistakes which remained uneorrected as of the time of the referee’s hearing. Respondent also failed to prorate his client’s 1980 tax bill with respect to several lots that had been conveyed in 1980 and failed to respond to the client’s request for proration. In addition, respondent overcharged the client the sum of $300 for services rendered in a mortgage foreclosure action.
The referee recommended that respondent be found gu’lty of violating Discipli nary Rule 1-102(A)(6) of The Florida Bar Code of Professional Responsibility (for conduct adversely reflecting on his fitness to practice law) and Disciplinary Rule 6-101(A)(3) (for neglecting a legal matter entrusted to him).
In determining the appropriate discipline, the referee considered respondent’s prior disciplinary history of a public reprimand and one year of probation for two misdemeanor income tax convictions in 1970, The Florida Bar v. Greene, 235 So. 2d 7 (Fla.1970), and a private reprimand for neglect in 1980. The referee recommended (1) that respondent receive a public reprimand and one year of probation with quarterly caseload reports to be submitted to The Florida Bar; (2) that respondent refund, within thirty days, the amount he overcharged his client and compensate her for the failure to prorate the 1980 taxes in the amount of $30; (3) that respondent prepare and record all necessary corrective deeds to clear title to the lands in question; (4) that respondent pay the costs of the disciplinary proceeding; and (5) if respondent fails to timely comply with the terms of the punishment, that he should be suspended from the practice of law for a period of ninety days.
The Florida Bar requests that this Court approve the punishment with the exception of the public reprimand, seeking instead a suspension for a period of at least ninety days. The Bar argues that, in view of respondent’s prior disciplinary history, a public reprimand is not sufficient discipline.
We accept the referee’s findings of fact and recommendations as to guilt, and we approve the recommended discipline.
Accordingly, respondent is found guilty of violating Disciplinary Rules 1-102(A)(6) and 6-101(A)(3). The publication of this opinion in Southern Reporter shall constitute the public reprimand. Respondent is placed on one year of bar-supervised probation, during which time he shall submit quarterly caseload reports to The Florida Bar. In addition, respondent shall refund the amount overcharged his client; compensate her for the failure to prorate her taxes; prepare and record all necessary corrective deeds to clear title to the lands in question; and pay the costs of this proceeding in the amount of $539.40. Judgment is entered against the respondent in the amount of $539.40, for which let execution issue. The respondent’s failure to comply with all of these conditions within thirty days from this date shall result in his immediate suspension from The Florida Bar for ninety days.
It is so ordered.
BOYD, C.J., and ADKINS, McDONALD and SHAW, JJ., concur. OVERTON, J., dissents with an opinion, in which ALDERMAN and EHRLICH, JJ., concur.
OVERTON, Justice,
dissenting.
I disagree with the discipline imposed. I fully agree with the Bar that, given this respondent’s prior disciplinary history, a public reprimand is insufficient punishment for these violations. Respondent’s misconduct, when viewed in conjunction with his disciplinary history, clearly requires a 90-day suspension from the practice of law. See The Florida Bar v. Hunt, 417 So. 2d 967 (Fla.1982); The Florida Bar v. Valantiejus, 355 So. 2d 425 (Fla.1978). I also believe that a three-year probationary period should be imposed after the respondent is reinstated.
ALDERMAN and EHRLICH, JJ., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
THE Florida BAR v. Greene, 485 So. 2d 1279 (Fla. 1986)…nt, John Montgomery Greene, should not be held in contempt of this Court for failure to observe the conditions of the one-year period of bar-supervised probation which was imposed on respondent for the reasons set forth in The Florida Bar v. Greene, 463 So. 2d 213 (Fla.1985). Respondent has failed to respond to the order. The Court finds respondent, John Montgomery Greene, in contempt of court and hereby suspends him from the practice of law for 90 days, effective 30 days from the date this opinion becomes fi…
-
THE Florida BAR v. Greene, 589 So. 2d 281 (Fla. 1991)…ary violations. See The Fla. Bar v. Greene, 557 So. 2d 35 (Fla.1990); The Fla. Bar v. Greene, 529 So. 2d 1103 (Fla.1988); The Fla. Bar v. Greene, 515 So. 2d 1280 (Fla.1987); The Fla. Bar v. Greene, 485 So. 2d 1279 (Fla.1986); The Fla. Bar v. Greene, 463 So. 2d 213 (Fla.1985); The Fla. Bar v. Greene, 235 So. 2d 7 (Fla.1970). He has completely disregarded lesser forms of discipline imposed by this Court. He has failed to abide by conditions of probation. He has continued to practice law despite his suspension.…
-
THE Florida BAR v. Greene, 515 So. 2d 1280 (Fla. 1987)…a Bar v. Greene, 235 So. 2d 7 (Fla. 1970), and was privately reprimanded in 1980 for neglect of a legal matter. In 1985, he received a one-year probation and public reprimand for neglecting a legal matter entrusted to him. The Florida Bar v. Greene, 463 So. 2d 213 (Fla.1985). Thereafter, he was held in contempt by this Court for failing to observe the conditions of his probation imposed in 1985. The Florida Bar v. Greene, 485 So. 2d 1279 (Fla.1986). As noted in Florida Bar v. Vemell, 374 So. 2d 473, 476 (Fla.…
Previewing 3 of 4 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceAuthorities Cited
- THE Florida BAR v. Greene, 235 So. 2d 7 (Fla. 1970)
- THE Florida BAR v. Hunt, 417 So. 2d 967 (Fla. 1982)
- THE Florida BAR v. Valantiejus, 355 So. 2d 425 (Fla. 1978)