THE FLORIDA BAR, COMPLAINANT,
v.
HAROLD B. HAIMOWITZ, 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 discipline against attorney Harold Haimowitz following his federal conviction for six felonies including mail fraud, conspiracy, and extortion. The Florida Supreme Court affirmed the referee's recommendation and disbarred Haimowitz effective immediately, finding that his criminal convictions and violations of multiple disciplinary rules warranted removal from the bar.
Disbarred. The Court held that conviction of felony charges, especially those involving moral turpitude and conduct prejudicial to the administration of justice, warrants disbarment. Haimowitz's federal felony convictions and violations of multiple disciplinary rules justified his immediate disbarment.
[1] Conviction of felony charges can warrant disbarment of an attorney.
[2] An attorney's conviction for crimes involving moral turpitude constitutes a violation of disciplinary rules.
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“Conviction of felony charges can warrant disbarment.”
Establishes the legal principle that felony convictions are sufficient grounds for attorney disbarment
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceHaimowitz, a member of The Florida Bar, was convicted in federal court of six felonies: conspiracy to use the postal service to execute a scheme to de…
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 Violation Of Disciplinary Rules cases and more on FLexlaw
PER CURIAM.
The Florida Bar filed a complaint against Haimowitz, a member of the bar, seeking appropriate discipline after Haimowitz was convicted of six felonies in federal court. The felonies included conspiracy to use the postal service to execute a scheme to defraud, obtaining property by false and fraudulent pretenses, conspiracy to obstruct interstate commerce by extortion, and mail fraud. After a hearing, the referee found that Haimowitz had violated disciplinary rules 1-102(A)(1) (violation of a disciplinary rule), 1-102(A)(3) (illegal conduct involving moral turpitude), 1-102(A)(4) (conduct involving dishonesty, fraud, deceit, or misrepresentation), 1-102(A)(5) (conduct prejudicial to the administration of justice), 1-102(A)(6) (conduct that adversely reflects on fitness to practice law), and integration rule 11.02(3)(a) (commission of an act contrary to honesty, justice, or good morals).1 The referee recommends that Haimowitz be disbarred.
Haimowitz filed a petition for review, maintaining his innocence of the offenses of which he was convicted. The bar responded that Haimowitz has failed to show the referee’s report and recommendations to be erroneous. Neither side filed a brief in support of its position.
Conviction of felony charges can warrant disbarment. The Florida Bar v. Onett,
504 So. 2d 388 (Fla.1987); The Florida Bar v. Adamo, 493 So. 2d 450 (Fla.1986). After studying the referee’s report and recommendations, we agree that Haimowitz should be disbarred. Accordingly, we hereby disbar Harold B. Haimowitz, effective immediately on the filing of this opinion. Judgment for costs in the amount of $789.60 is hereby entered against Haimow-itz, for which sum let execution issue.
It is so ordered.
McDonald, C.J., and OVERTON, EHRLICH, SHAW, BARKETT, GRIMES and KOGAN, JJ., concur. . All references are to the former bar rules because this case was heard prior to adoption of the Rules Regulating Florida Bar. . Onett and Haimowitz were co-conspirators. Onett was convicted in federal court of the same charges as those against Haimowitz and was disbarred by this Court.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Authorities Cited
- THE Florida BAR v. Onett, 504 So. 2d 388 (Fla. 1987)
- THE Florida BAR v. Adamo, 493 So. 2d 450 (Fla. 1986)
- State v. Pete, 493 So. 2d 450 (Fla. 1986)