THE FLORIDA BAR, COMPLAINANT,
v.
BURTON R. LEVEY, 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 approves the referee's report, finds the respondent guilty of professional misconduct, and orders a public reprimand.
Respondent advised a client whose business affairs were affected by possible criminal activities, violating professional responsibility rules. A condi…
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 Conditional Guilty Plea cases and more on FLexlaw
PER CURIAM.
This disciplinary proceeding is before the Court for consideration of the referee’s report. The referee accepted a conditional guilty plea from the respondent, Burton R. Levey, and recommended the disciplinary measure set forth in a consent judgment approved by The Florida Bar. Based on respondent’s admission that he continued to advise and represent a certain client with regard to that client’s ostensibly legitimate business affairs when respondent knew or should have known that the client’s business affairs were to some extent affected by or connected with possible criminal activities on the part of the client, the referee recommended, in accordance with the consent plea, that respondent be found guilty of the following violations of the former Code of Professional Responsibility of The Florida Bar: Disciplinary Rule 2-110(B)(2), for failing to withdraw from representation when continued employment was likely to result in unethical conduct; and Disciplinary Rule 1-102(A)(6), for conduct adversely reflecting on fitness to practice law.
Consistent with the conditional guilty plea and consent judgment approved by the Bar, the referee recommended that respondent receive a public reprimand to be administered through a personal appearance before the Board of Governors.
We approve the referee’s report. We adjudge the respondent guilty of professional misconduct as set forth in the report and order that he receive a public reprimand to be administered through a personal appearance before the Board of Governors of The Florida Bar. The costs of this proceeding are taxed against the respondent. Judgment for costs in the amount of $22,055.36 is hereby entered against Burton R. Levey, for which sum let execution issue.
It is so ordered.
MCDONALD, C.J., and OVERTON, EHRLICH, SHAW, BARKETT and GRIMES, JJ., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By (53 total)
-
Mansfield v. State, 758 So. 2d 636 (Fla. 2000)…ve caused the victim’s wounds, based on the medical examiner’s testimony and the other evidence linking this knife to Ramirez.” We review a trial court’s ruling on a section 90.403 objection on an abuse of discretion standard. See State v. McClain, 525 So. 2d 420, 422 (Fla.1988). In making its determination the trial court must weigh the danger of unfair prejudice against the probative value, and in doing so proper considerations include “the need for the evidence; the tendency of the evidence to suggest an…
-
Walker v. State, 707 So. 2d 300 (Fla. 1997)…ative evidence. This section shall not be construed to mean that evidence of the existence of available third-party benefits is inadmissible. We explained the balancing test which a trial court must perform under section 90.403 in State v. McClain, 525 So. 2d 420 (Fla.1988): This statute compels the trial court to weigh the danger of unfair prejudice against the probative value. In applying the balancing test, the trial court necessarily exercises its discretion. Indeed, the same item of evidence may be adm…
-
Taylor v. State, 855 So. 2d 1 (Fla. 2003)…endency of the evidence to suggest an improper basis to the jury for resolving the matter, e.g., an emotional basis; the chain of inference necessary to establish the material fact; and the effectiveness of a limiting instruction. State v. McClain, 525 So. 2d 420, 422 (Fla.1988) (quoting Charles W. Ehrhardt, Florida Evidence § 403.1, at 100-03 (2d ed.1984)). Although the credit application may have had limited relevancy to show that Taylor was shopping for an expensive item and would need money to pay for i…
Previewing 3 of 53 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence