THE FLORIDA BAR, COMPLAINANT,
v.
GEORGE E. OLLINGER, III, 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 disciplined attorney George E. Ollinger for multiple violations arising from an audit of his trust account, including charging excessive fees, mishandling client funds, and failing to maintain proper closing statements and supervision. The Supreme Court imposed a 60-day suspension, three-year probation with required CPA oversight, and restitution to affected clients.
Ollinger was found guilty of violating disciplinary rules 2-106(A), 2-106(E), 3-104(C), 3-104(D), and 9-102(B)(4), as well as article XI, rule 11.02(4) of the integration rule. The Court imposed a 60-day suspension with automatic reinstatement, three-year probation requiring CPA oversight, restitution to clients, and costs of $4,087.82.
[1] An attorney may be found guilty of violating disciplinary rules regarding charging excessive fees.
[2] An attorney may be found guilty of violating disciplinary rules concerning the preparation, execution, and retention of closing statements.
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“Neither party takes exception to the referee's findings and recommendations. Accordingly, we adopt the referee's report and impose the following disciplinary actions”
Establishes that the Supreme Court accepted the referee's factual findings without dispute and imposed discipline accordingly
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceAn audit of Ollinger's trust account, conducted after a previous disciplinary proceeding, revealed multiple violations. Ollinger had charged excessive…
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 Misapplication Of Funds cases and more on FLexlaw
PER CURIAM.
This is a disciplinary action brought by the Florida Bar against George E. Ollinger, a member of the Florida Bar. This action arose from an audit of Ollinger’s trust account conducted after the close of a previous disciplinary proceeding.* Pursuant to the results of that audit, the referee recommends that Ollinger be found guilty of violating disciplinary rules 2-106(A) (charging excessive fees), 2-106(E) (failure to prepare, execute, and retain closing statements), 3-104(C) (insufficient supervision of nonlawyer personnel), 3-104(D) (improper delegation of work to nonlawyer), and 9-102(B)(4) (failure to promptly pay to client funds to which he is entitled), as well as article XI, rule 11.02(4) (misapplication of funds held for a specific purpose) of the integration rule and certain bylaws thereunder as specified in the referee’s report. Neither party takes exception to the referee’s findings and recommendations.
Accordingly, we adopt the referee’s report and impose the following disciplinary actions: (1) suspension from the practice of law in Florida for sixty (60) days with automatic reinstatement at the end of said suspension; (2) probation for a period of three (3) years during which time Ollinger will retain, at his own expense, the services of a certified public accountant who will review Ollinger’s trust account, contingency fee files, closing statements, and disbursements as detailed in the referee’s report and who shall submit monthly statements to the Florida Bar; and (3) restitution to certain clients in the amounts specified in the referee’s report. Judgment for costs in the amount of $4,087.82 is hereby entered against Ollinger, for which sum let execution issue. So that Ollinger can make arrangements to protect his clients’ interests, this suspension will be effective thirty days from the date of filing this opinion.
It is so ordered.
ADKINS, Acting C.J., and McDONALD, EHRLICH, SHAW and BARKETT, JJ., concur. *
See Florida Bar v. Ollinger, 478 So. 2d 1068 (Fla.1985) (public reprimand for violations of disciplinary rules 1-102(A)(1) and 3-104(C), (D) of the Code of Professional Responsibility).
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
THE Florida BAR v. Shanzer, 572 So. 2d 1382 (Fla. 1991)…602 (Fla.1989); The Fla. Bar v. Gillis, 527 So. 2d 818 (Fla.1988); The Fla. Bar v. Newhouse, 520 So. 2d 25 (Fla.1988); The Fla. Bar v. Bookman, 502 So. 2d 893 (Fla.1987); The Fla. Bar v. Knowles, 500 So. 2d 140 (Fla.1986); The Fla. Bar v. Rodriguez, 489 So. 2d 726 (Fla.1986); The Fla. Bar v. Ross, 417 So. 2d 985 (Fla.1982). In the case before us, we likewise fail to find that the mitigating evidence submitted warrants a discipline less than disbarment.2 Respondent argues that his depression, primarily over h…
-
THE Florida BAR v. Graham, 605 So. 2d 53 (Fla. 1992)…602 (Fla.1989); The Fla. Bar v. Gillis, 527 So. 2d 818 (Fla.1988); The Fla. Bar v. Newhouse, 520 So. 2d 25 (Fla.1988); The Fla. Bar v. Bookman, 502 So. 2d 893 (Fla.1987); The Fla. Bar v. Knowles, 500 So. 2d 140 (Fla.1986); The Fla. Bar v. Rodriguez, 489 So. 2d 726 (Fla.1986); The Fla. Bar v. Ross, 417 So. 2d 985 (Fla.1982). We find that the mitigating factors in the instant ease do not outweigh the presumption that disbarment is the appropriate discipline. Our review of the record reveals the existence of tw…
-
THE Florida BAR v. Knowles, 572 So. 2d 1373 (Fla. 1991)…his case. Respondent was found guilty of misappropriating funds. Unquestionably, the misuse of client funds is one of the most serious offenses a lawyer can commit. Misuse of a client’s funds in itself warrants disbarment. The Fla. Bar v. Rodriguez, 489 So. 2d 726 (Fla.1986); The Fla. Bar v. Wolbert, 446 So. 2d 1071 (Fla.1984). Finally, the two matters involving serious neglect and inattentiveness also warrant disbarment, especially since respondent has been disciplined previously for similar behavior. The F…
Previewing 3 of 6 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. Ollinger, 478 So. 2d 1068 (Fla. 1985)
- Md. Cas. Co. v. Reliance Ins. Co., 478 So. 2d 1068 (Fla. 1985)