THE FLORIDA BAR, PETITIONER,
v.
SANDRA KING, 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 sanctions against Sandra King for unauthorized practice of law. The court approved the referee's findings that King engaged in multiple unauthorized legal activities, including conducting client interviews, drafting legal documents, providing legal advice, and acting as co-counsel, and permanently enjoined her from these activities.
The court approved the referee's findings that King engaged in unauthorized practice of law and permanently enjoined her from conducting interviews and selecting forms for clients, drafting form entries, providing legal consultation and advice, directing evidence accumulation, giving legal advice requiring legal skill and knowledge of law, and selecting and monitoring attorneys acting as counsel of record.
[1] Engaging in the unauthorized practice of law may result in permanent injunction and indirect criminal contempt.
[2] Providing legal advice and making decisions requiring legal skill beyond that of the average citizen constitutes the unauthorized practice of law.
Previewing 2 of 5 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“respondent had been engaged in the unauthorized practice of law through actions which include, but are not necessarily limited to the following”
Establishes the scope of unauthorized conduct found by the referee
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceThe referee found that King conducted interviews with clients, selected legal forms based on their responses, drafted information entries for forms, p…
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 Legal Advice cases and more on FLexlaw
PER CURIAM.
This unauthorized practice of law proceeding is before us on the complaint of The Florida Bar and report of the Honorable Guy W. Spicola, circuit court judge, as referee. Both parties to this proceeding stipulated and agreed to the entry of the recommendations of the referee.
In his report, the referee concluded that respondent had been engaged in the unauthorized practice of law through actions which include, but are not necessarily limited to the following:
1. Respondent conducted interviews of “clients” and based upon their responses selected the particular forms to be used.
2. Respondent drafted the entries of information for the blanks on the forms. 3. Respondent had direct contact in the nature of consultation, explanation, recommendations, advice and assistance in the provision, selection and completion of forms.
4. Respondent suggested, directed, and participated in the accumulation of evidence to be submitted with the completed forms.
5. Respondent gave advice and made decisions on behalf of others which required legal skill and a knowledge of the law greater than that possessed by the average citizen.
6. Respondent selected, negotiated compensation for, and monitored the efforts of attorneys acting as “counsel of record” for respondent’s “clients” and in effect acted as “co-counsel”.
We approve the referee’s report and therefore permanently enjoin respondent from engaging in the above acts and from otherwise engaging in the unauthorized practice of law in the state of Florida. In the event respondent engages in any conduct enjoined herein, and has not been duly licensed to practice law in this state, respondent will be found in indirect criminal contempt of the Supreme Court of Florida for the unauthorized practice of law in this state.
The parties to this action will each bear their own costs.
It is so ordered.
BOYD, C.J., and ADKINS, OVERTON, McDONALD and EHRLICH, JJ., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
THE Florida BAR v. Schramek, 616 So. 2d 979 (Fla. 1993)…d simplified forms are not intended to be used by nonlawyers as a means to practice law or to give legal advice and nonlawyers are prohibited and enjoined from performing functions other than those set forth in rule 10-1.1(b)); The Fla. Bar v. King, 468 So. 2d 982 (Fla.1985) (having direct contact with clients in the nature of consultation, explanation, recommendations, advice, and assistance in the provision, selection, and completion of forms is the unauthorized practice of law); The Fla. Bar v. Valdes, 464…
-
THE Florida BAR v. Neiman, 816 So. 2d 587 (Fla. 2002)…Court has enjoined nonlawyers from “suggesting, directing, or participating in the accumulation of evidence to be submitted with the completed forms.” Eubanks, 752 So. 2d at 544 (emphasis added); see Schramek, 616 So. 2d at 987; Florida Bar v. King, 468 So. 2d 982, 983 (Fla.1985). The referee’s recommendation in the instant case is similar- to the cited cases in that it enjoins Nei-man from having a directive role in the accumulation of evidence. Although Neiman argues that this language will prevent him from…
-
THE Florida BAR v. Davide, 702 So. 2d 184 (Fla. 1997)…discharge most debts and Chapter 13 — save your home. The aforementioned actions of the Respondents have violated the letter and spirit of this Court’s decisions in The Florida Bar v. Brumbaugh, 355 So. 2d 1186 (Fla.1978); The Florida Bar v. King, 468 So. 2d 982 (Fla.1985); The Florida Bar v. Matus, 528 So. 2d 895 (Fla.1988); In re Joint Petition of The Florida Bar and Raymond James and Associates, 215 So. 2d 613 (Fla.1968); The Florida Bar v. Consolidated Business and Legal Forms, 386 So. 2d 797 (Fla.1980)…
Previewing 3 of 6 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence