THE FLORIDA BAR, COMPLAINANT,
v.
BAILEY M. WELDEN, 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 brought a disciplinary action against attorney Bailey M. Welden for professional misconduct involving conflicts of interest and dishonest conduct. The court approved a conditional guilty plea and imposed a public reprimand with costs assessed against the respondent.
The court approved the referee's findings that Welden violated five disciplinary rules (1-102(A)(4), 5-101(A), 5-104(A), 5-105(A), and 5-105(B)) and imposed a public reprimand as the appropriate discipline based on his conditional guilty plea.
[1] A conditional guilty plea for a consent judgment in a disciplinary proceeding may be approved by the court.
[2] Conduct involving dishonesty, fraud, deceit, or misrepresentation constitutes professional misconduct.
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“This disciplinary proceeding is before the Court for consideration of a referee's report finding professional misconduct and recommending a public reprimand pursuant to the respondent attorney's conditional guilty plea for a consent judgment.”
Establishes the nature of the proceeding and the basis for the discipline—a conditional guilty plea with agreed-upon remedy.
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceAttorney Welden engaged in conduct involving dishonesty, fraud, deceit, or misrepresentation. He accepted employment where his financial, business, pr…
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 Professional Discipline cases and more on FLexlaw
PER CURIAM.
This disciplinary proceeding is before the Court for consideration of a referee’s report finding professional misconduct and recommending a public reprimand pursuant to the respondent attorney’s conditional guilty plea for a consent judgment.
Based on the respondent’s conditional guilty plea approved by The Florida Bar and providing for a public reprimand, the referee found respondent guilty of the following ethical violations:
Disciplinary Rule 1-102(A)(4) * (conduct involving dishonesty, fraud, deceit, or misrepresentation);
Disciplinary Rule 5-101(A) (accepting employment where the exercise of professional judgment on behalf of client will or reasonably may be affected by his financial, business, property, or personal interest, without consent of client after full disclosure);
Disciplinary Rule 5-104(A) (entering into a business transaction with a client where they have differing interests and the client expects the lawyer to exercise professional judgment for the protection of the client, without consent after full disclosure);
Disciplinary Rule 5-105(A) (accepting proffered employment where the exercise of independent professional judgment will or is likely to be adversely affected);
Disciplinary Rule 5-105(B) (continuing multiple employment where the exercise of independent professional judgment will or is likely to be adversely affected by representation of another client).
We approve the referee’s report. We hereby reprimand attorney Bailey M. Wel-den.
The costs of this proceeding are assessed against the respondent. Judgment is entered against the respondent in the amount of $1,821.23, for which sum let execution issue.
It is so ordered.
MCDONALD, C.J., and OVERTON, EHRLICH, SHAW, BARKETT, GRIMES and KOGAN, JJ., concur. *
Disciplinary Rules cited are found in the former Florida Bar Code of Professional Responsibility.