THE FLORIDA BAR, COMPLAINANT,
v.
DONALD G. DONALDSON, RESPONDENT

Fla. | 1985-03-21
No. 63993
OVERTON, A.C.J., and ALDERMAN, MCDONALD, EHRLICH and SHAW, JJ., concur.
466 So. 2d 216 Florida Supreme Court (1985)

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 Bar brought an attorney-discipline proceeding against Donald G. Donaldson for failing to file federal income tax returns. The court adopted the referee's findings that the failure was not willful but due to alcoholism, and approved the recommended discipline.


Holding

The court approved the referee's findings of fact and recommended discipline, ordering a public reprimand and three years of probation with specific conditions related to abstaining from alcohol and participating in Alcoholics Anonymous.


Headnotes

[1] An attorney's failure to file federal income tax returns may constitute a violation of professional responsibility rules.

[2] Active and uncontrolled alcoholism can be considered a mitigating factor in attorney disciplinary proceedings.

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

“The referee found that respondent’s “failure to file was not willful but was the result of active and uncontrolled alcoholism during the time of the events in question.””

This quote establishes the referee's key finding regarding the cause of the respondent's misconduct.

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

The Florida Bar charged respondent with failing to file federal income tax returns for 1975-1978. The referee found this failure was not willful but r…

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 attorney-discipline proceeding is before us on the complaint of The Florida Bar, the respondent’s conditional guilty plea for consent judgment, and the report of the referee.*

The Florida Bar charged respondent with failing to file federal income tax returns for the years 1975 through 1978. The referee found that respondent’s “failure to file was not willful but was the result of active and uncontrolled alcoholism during the time of the events in question.” The referee recommended that respondent be found guilty of violating article XI, Rules 11.-02(3)(a) and (b) of the Integration Rule of The Florida Bar and Disciplinary Rules 1-102(A)(6) of The Florida Bar Code of Professional Responsibility. Further, the referee recommended that respondent receive a public reprimand and that he be placed on bar-supervised probation for a period of three years with the following conditions: (a) that respondent abstain from the consumption of alcoholic beverages; (b) that he remain active in Alcoholics Anonymous, attend weekly meetings, practice AA principles in all of his affairs; and carry the AA message to other alcoholics; (c) that he submit quarterly reports stating that he is attending the AA meetings and is sober and free from active alcoholism; and (d) that he comply with the agreed-upon payment schedule regarding the payment of back taxes owed to the Internal Revenue Service.

We approve the referee’s findings of fact and recommended discipline. Accordingly, respondent shall receive a public reprimand and shall be placed on bar-supervised probation for a period of three years under the above-mentioned conditions. The publication of this opinion in Southern Reporter shall constitute respondent’s public reprimand. Judgment for the costs of this proceeding in the amount of $1,166.80 is hereby entered against respondent, for which let execution issue.

It is so ordered.

OVERTON, A.C.J., and ALDERMAN, MCDONALD, EHRLICH and SHAW, JJ., concur. *

We have jurisdiction. Art. V, § IS, Fla. Const.


Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus

Full citator, related cases, and AI research tools

Open in FLexlaw