THE FLORIDA BAR, COMPLAINANT,
v.
GARY R. GROMET, 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 accepts the attorney's conditional guilty plea and approves the agreed-upon discipline of disbarment.
Attorney Gary R. Gromet faced disciplinary proceedings after felony convictions. He entered a conditional guilty plea, agreeing to disbarment if any c…
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 Conduct Adversely Reflecting On Fitness To Practice Law cases and more on FLexlaw
PER CURIAM.
This case is a disciplinary proceeding involving charges of professional misconduct on the part of attorney Gary R. Gromet. Before the Court for consideration is his conditional guilty plea for consent judgment filed pursuant to rule 3-7.8(a) of the Rules Regulating The Florida Bar. The respondent attorney’s guilty plea states that he has been convicted in United States District Court on several felony charges. He acknowledges by his plea that he is guilty of violating article XI, Rule 11.02(3) of the former Florida Bar Integration Rule (commission of an act contrary to honesty, justice and good morals) and the former Code of Professional Responsibility, Disciplinary Rules 1-102(A)(3) (engaging in illegal conduct involving moral turpitude); 1-102(A)(4) (conduct involving dishonesty); 1-102(A)(5) (conduct prejudicial to the administration of justice); and 1-102(A)(6) (conduct adversely reflecting on fitness to practice law). The respondent agreed to the imposition of disbarment as a disciplinary measure, conditional upon the affirmance on appeal of any one of his several felony convictions.
The Florida Bar has now established the fulfillment of the condition set forth in respondent’s conditional guilty plea. The Bar asks that we approve the plea and impose the agreed discipline. The conditional guilty plea for consent judgment has been approved by a designated reviewer on behalf of the Board of Governors.
Accordingly, we accept the guilty plea and approve the agreed discipline. Gary R. Gromet is hereby disbarred, effective immediately.
It is so ordered.
MCDONALD, C.J„ and OVERTON, EHRLICH, SHAW, BARKETT, GRIMES and KOGAN, JJ., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Blue Cross/Blue Shield United of Wisconsin v. Inverrary Hotel Corp., 579 So. 2d 863 (Fla. 4th DCA 1991)…rcumstances, was inapplicable here and that the unauthorized claim of lien filed by appellant in the first action was of no legal effect. Therefore, the judgment is affirmed. We find nothing in Jack Eckerd Corp. v. Williamson Cadillac Leasing, Inc., 507 So. 2d 1102 (Fla. 1987) or Blue Cross and Blue Shield of Florida, Inc. v. Matthews, 498 So. 2d 421 (Fla.1986), or the other authorities relied on by appellant, recognizing subrogation rights of health care insurers, to be inconsistent with this position. ANST…