THE FLORIDA BAR, COMPLAINANT,
v.
KEITH M. KRASNOVE, 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 recommendation for a public reprimand and enters judgment for costs against the respondent.
The Florida Bar filed a complaint against the respondent attorney for threatening criminal charges to gain an advantage in a civil suit. The responden…
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 Florida Bar Integration Rule, Article Xi, Rule 11.02(3)(A) cases and more on FLexlaw
BARKETT, Justice.
This disciplinary proceeding is before us on complaint of The Florida Bar, respondent's conditional guilty plea for consent judgment and the uncontested report of the referee. We have jurisdiction pursuant to Article V, section 15, Florida Constitution.
Respondent acknowledged his violation of Florida Bar Integration Rule, article XI, Rule 11.02(3)(a), and Florida Bar Code of Professional Responsibility, Disciplinary Rule 7-105, for threatening to present criminal charges for the sole purpose of gaining an advantage in a civil suit. The referee recommended that respondent be publicly reprimanded.
We approve the referee’s recommendation. Accordingly, respondent is directed to appear before the Board of Governors of The Florida Bar at its next meeting to receive a public reprimand.
Judgment for costs in the sum of $328.50 is hereby entered against respondent, for which sum let execution issue.
It is so ordered.
ADKINS, Acting C.J., and OVERTON, McDONALD and EHRLICH, JJ., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
THE Florida BAR v. Krasnove, 697 So. 2d 1208 (Fla. 1997)….J., and OVERTON, SHAW, GRIMES, HARDING, WELLS and ANSTEAD, JJ., concur. . In 1986, Krasnove was publicly reprimanded for threatening to present criminal charges for the sole purpose of gaining an advantage in a civil suit. Florida Bar v. Krasnove, 487 So. 2d 1072 (Fla.1986). . The purpose of attorney discipline is that it protect the public from unethical conduct and have a deterrent effect while still being fair to the attorney. Florida Bar v. Neu, 597 So. 2d 266, 269 (Fla.1992).…