THE FLORIDA BAR, COMPLAINANT,
v.
IRVING B. GUSSOW, 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 Supreme Court affirmed a referee's finding that attorney Irving B. Gussow willfully violated a temporary suspension order and imposed disbarred status as contempt sanction, with conditions including restitution to harmed clients and payment of disciplinary costs before readmission eligibility.
The Court found that Gussow willfully failed to abide by the temporary suspension order and imposed disbarment as the contempt sanction. Disbarment is to run concurrently with disbarment imposed in related disciplinary cases, with conditions that Gussow make restitution to harmed clients and the Clients' Security Fund, pay $3,086.50 in costs, and refrain from legal employment except as permitted for disbarred lawyers.
[1] A lawyer may be found in contempt of court for willfully failing to abide by an order of temporary suspension.
[2] A referee may recommend disbarment as a sanction for a lawyer's willful contempt of a court order.
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“the respondent had willfully failed to abide by the previously entered order of temporary suspension”
Establishes the factual basis for the contempt finding based on the referee's determination and consent judgment.
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceGussow had been temporarily suspended by court order on November 14, 1986. He willfully failed to comply with that suspension order. A consent judgmen…
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 Payment Of Costs cases and more on FLexlaw
PER CURIAM.
This proceeding is before the Court upon the motion of The Florida Bar for an order finding respondent Irving B. Gussow to be in contempt of this Court for failing to comply with the order of temporary suspension entered on November 14, 1986, in the case of The Florida Bar v. Gussow, No. 69,586. We issued an order to show cause, received a response and further pleadings, and appointed a referee. We now consider the referee’s report.
Pursuant to a consent judgment submitted by the respondent and approved by The Florida Bar, the referee found that the respondent had willfully failed to abide by the previously entered order of temporary suspension. The referee recommended that respondent be found in contempt of this Court. As a sanction for this willful contempt, the referee recommends that respondent be disbarred. As is stated in the consent judgment, this disbarment is to be “concurrent discipline to that recommended in the July 7, 1987, Report of Referee in Case Nos. 69,645 and 69,989,” by which it is meant that there is to be no extension of the five-year period that must expire before an application for readmission can be filed.* Other conditions recommended by the referee are: that respondent not be eligible for readmission until restitution has been made to all clients harmed by respondent’s misconduct, including The Florida Bar’s Clients’ Security Fund, and until he has paid the costs incurred in the other disciplinary proceedings in the amount of $3,086.50; and that respondent be ordered to refrain from legal employment except such as is specifically allowed to disbarred lawyers under rule 3-6.1 of the Rules of Discipline.
We approve the referee’s report and hereby impose judgment accordingly with the foregoing conditions. Since respondent has already been disbarred, there is no need for a formal order of disbarment.
The costs of this proceeding are taxed against the respondent. Judgment for costs in the amount of $150 is hereby entered against Irving B. Gussow, for which sum let execution issue.
It is so ordered.
McDonald, C.J., and OVERTON, ERHLICH, SHAW, BARKETT, GRIMES and KOGAN, JJ., concur. *
On review of the referee’s report in those cases, this Court imposed a judgment of disbarment. The Florida Bar v. Gussow, 519 So. 2d 603 (Fla.1988).