THE FLORIDA BAR, COMPLAINANT,
v.
STEVEN L. SOMMERS, 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 approval of Steven Sommers's conditional guilty plea and consent judgment for professional misconduct involving neglect of client legal matters across five separate instances. The Florida Supreme Court accepted the plea and approved a 90-day suspension (running retroactively concurrent with a prior suspension) and three-year probation running concurrent with prior probation.
The Court accepted the respondent's plea and approved the consent judgment, imposing a 90-day suspension from the practice of law with retroactive effect to run concurrently with the suspension previously imposed, and three-year probation running concurrently with and under the same conditions as the probation previously ordered.
[1] An attorney's misconduct, including neglect of legal matters and failure to carry out agreements for professional services, can constitute violations of disciplinary rule…
[2] Disciplinary rules prohibit violations of other disciplinary rules, conduct adversely reflecting on fitness to practice law, and neglecting legal matters.
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“In his plea respondent states that he neglected legal matters entrusted to him by clients. He describes five separate instances of failure to carry out agreements for professional services.”
Establishes the nature and scope of the misconduct admitted in the conditional guilty plea.
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceRespondent attorney Sommers neglected legal matters entrusted to him by clients in five separate instances, failing to carry out agreements for profes…
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.
The Florida Bar petitions the Court for approval of the respondent attorney’s conditional guilty plea for a consent judgment. The plea was filed pursuant to Rule 3-7.-8(a) of the Rules Regulating The Florida Bar. In his plea respondent states that he neglected legal matters entrusted to him by clients. He describes five separate instances of failure to carry out agreements for professional services. Respondent admits that his misconduct in these matters constituted violations of the following Disciplinary Rules of the former Florida Bar Code of Professional Responsibility: D.R. 1-102(A)(1) (violation of a disciplinary rule); D.R. 1-102(A)(6) (conduct adversely reflecting on fitness to practice law); D.R. 6-101(A)(3) (neglecting a legal matter); D.R. 7-101(A)(l) (failure to seek the lawful objectives of a client); and D.R. 7-101(A)(2) (failure to carry out a contract of employment with a client). In one of the instances, respondent admits to a violation of D.R. 9-102(B)(4) (failure to promptly deliver funds or property as requested).
The respondent’s plea states that the factual background and underlying causes of his misconduct are the same as were described in this Court’s opinion in The Florida Bar v. Sommers, 508 So. 2d 341 (Fla.1987). In that proceeding, respondent was found guilty on several counts of neglecting clients’ cases and was subjected to certain specified disciplinary measures. The consent judgment in the instant case, approved by The Florida Bar, provides for a suspension from the practice of law for ninety days, to commence retroactively and run concurrently with the suspension ordered in the earlier proceeding. In addition, respondent is to be placed on probation for three years, to run concurrently with and under the same terms and conditions as the probation imposed in the earlier proceeding.
We accept respondent’s plea and approve the consent judgment. Respondent shall be suspended from the practice of law for ninety days, with retroactive effect, allowing the suspension to run concurrently with the suspension previously imposed. Respondent is placed on probation for three years to run concurrently with and under the same conditions as the probation previously ordered.
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
-
THE Florida BAR v. Roberts, 689 So. 2d 1049 (Fla. 1997)…alously, failing to communicate effectively with one’s client, and failing to provide competent representation are all serious deficiencies, even when there is no evidence of intentional misrepresentation or fraud. See, e.g., Florida Bar v. Sommers, 513 So. 2d 665 (Fla.1987) (neglect of legal matters and failure to promptly deliver funds or property as requested warrants ninety-day suspension and three-year probation); Florida Bar v. Rosenberg, 474 So. 2d 1175 (Fla.1985) (neglecting a legal matter warrants ni…
Authorities Cited
- THE Florida BAR v. Sommers, 508 So. 2d 341 (Fla. 1987)