THE FLORIDA BAR, COMPLAINANT,
v.
LOUIS C. ROSETTI, JR., 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.
Louis C. Rosetti, Jr., an attorney admitted to practice in Florida since 1952, petitioned the Florida Supreme Court for permission to resign from the bar without leave to reapply. The court approved his petition after reviewing serious disciplinary issues including trust account mismanagement, failure to maintain required records, and improper transfers of client funds.
The court approved Rosetti's petition for resignation without leave to reapply, effective thirty days from the opinion date, allowing him time to close his practice and protect clients' interests while prohibiting him from accepting any new business.
[1] A lawyer may petition to resign from the bar without leave to reapply, provided certain conditions are met.
[2] Failure to produce trust account records during an audit can constitute grounds for disciplinary action.
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“Petition for Leave to Resign Without Leave to Reapply pursuant to Florida Bar Integration Rule, article XI, Rule 11.08”
Establishes the procedural mechanism under which Rosetti sought to resign from the bar
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceRosetti had a history of disciplinary action (private reprimand in 1971, 30-day suspension and probation in 1976, public reprimand and supervised prob…
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 Waiver Of Confidentiality cases and more on FLexlaw
PER CURIAM.
This matter is before the Court on Respondent’s Petition for Leave to Resign Without Leave to Reapply pursuant to Florida Bar Integration Rule, article XI, Rule 11.08.
The Petition states:
1. [Respondent] was admitted to practice law in the State of Florida in June of 1952....
2. [Respondent] has received disciplinary action in the past. In 1976, [Respondent] received a 30 day suspension and three years probation, a public reprimand and three years supervised probation in 1980, and a private reprimand in 1971.
3. Pending disciplinary action against [Respondent] involves the following:
a. [Respondent] maintained a trust account at Barnett Bank, St. Petersburg, Florida. b. During the course of an audit by Pedro J. Pizarro, The Florida Bar Auditor, the [Respondent] failed to produce records from Account No. 2422712229 for the period of January 1,1979 through December 31, 1981 and for January and February 1985....
c. [Respondent] also failed to prepare monthly reconciliations for the above trust account after June 30, 1984.
d. Account reconciliations reconstructed by Pedro J. Pizarro, The Florida Bar’s Auditor, reflected frequent shortages in the [Respondent’s] trust account.
e. Also reflected in the reconciliations were numerous overages that were larger than necessary to cover reasonable bank charges.
f. In January 1982, the [Respondent] was named as co-counsel to Samuel Cohen, the personal representative of the estate of Charlotte Cohen.
g. On May 28, 1982, the [Respondent] received a loan from Samuel Cohen in the amount of $27,000.00.
h. On the same day, the respondent deposited the loan in his trust account, bringing the total balance in the account to $27,612.91.
i. The [Respondent] then transferred over $15,000.00 from the trust account to his general office account and $10,726.00 to the account entitled Estate of Albert L. Riechmann, Account No. 247117444 (both transfers occurred on May 28, 1982).
j. Prior to the deposit made on May 28, 1982, the account of Estate of Albert L. Riechmann had a total balance of $12.22.
k. Subsequent to the deposit made on May 28, 1982, the [Respondent] made disbursements of $10,725.51 to Mr. Riechmann’s beneficiaries as their first distributive shares of the estate.
l. After the final disbursements from the estate, the total balance in the estate’s account was $12.71, which the bank took as payment for service charges.
m.On September 18, 1985, [Respondent] waived probable cause to the grievance committee hearing of the Sixth Judicial Circuit Grievance Committee D.
4. [Respondent] waives confidentiality of this proceeding pursuant to Florida Bar Integration Rule, article XI, Rule 11.12(l)(a).
5. [Respondent] agrees to cooperate fully with any investigation made in connection with the Client Security Fund of The Florida Bar. 6. [Respondent] will also make all reasonable efforts to reimburse the Client Security Fund of The Florida Bar for payment made by the fund as a result of his conduct.
7. In connection with this petition, [Respondent] alleges that he is making arrangements with other counsel to complete any work in progress under existing fee arrangements, at the option of any such client involved, should this petition be granted.
8. [Respondent] freely and voluntarily submits this Petition to Resign without Leave to Reapply, and he states there was no intent on his part to injure anyone or to cause anyone to suffer any loss.
The Florida Bar having now filed its response supporting the Petition for Leave to Resign on the conditions set forth above, and the Court having reviewed the same and determined that the requirements of Florida Bar Integration Rule, article XI, Rule 11.08(3) are fully satisfied, the Petition for Leave to Resign Without Leave to Reapply is hereby approved. Louis C. Ro-setti, Jr.’s name is hereby stricken from the roll of attorney in the State of Florida effective thirty (30) days from the date of this opinion thereby allowing respondent to close out his practice and take the necessary steps to protect his clients. Respondent shall accept no new business from the date of this opinion. See Florida Bar Integration Rule, article XI, Rule 11.10(7).
It is so ordered.
McDonald, C.J., and ADKINS, OYER-TON, SHAW and BARKETT, JJ., concur.