THE FLORIDA BAR, COMPLAINANT,
v.
HERBERT P. SAPP, JR., 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 disciplined attorney Herbert P. Sapp, Jr. for professional misconduct across three separate client matters involving neglect of legal work, failure to communicate, and breach of employment duties. The Florida Supreme Court approved the referee's findings and imposed a 30-day suspension from the practice of law.
The Court found Sapp guilty of violating Disciplinary Rules 1-102(A)(4) (conduct involving dishonesty), 6-101(A)(3) (neglect of a legal matter), and 7-101(A)(2) (failure to carry out a contract of employment) across the three counts, and suspended him from the practice of law for thirty days.
[1] An attorney violates disciplinary rules by failing to clear a land title, failing to communicate with a client, and causing a land sale contract to be rescinded.
[2] An attorney violates disciplinary rules by neglecting a legal matter, causing delays, and demanding an additional fee to complete work within a limited timeframe.
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“Although respondent performed part of the work, he failed to clear a land title for the client and failed to communicate with the client. The respondent's delay caused a land sale contract to be rescinded.”
Establishes the primary misconduct on count one: neglect of legal matter and failure to communicate causing client harm.
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceRespondent was retained in three separate matters and paid retainers by clients. In the first matter, he partially performed work but failed to clear …
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 Neglect Of Legal Matter cases and more on FLexlaw
PER CURIAM.
This disciplinary proceeding is before the Court for consideration of the referee’s report. Neither party seeks review of the report.
The referee’s findings of misconduct are set forth in three counts. On count one, the referee found that respondent agreed to provide legal services to a client and was paid a retainer. Although respondent performed part of the work, he failed to clear a land title for the client and failed to communicate with the client. The respondent’s delay caused a land sale contract to be rescinded. The referee recommended that respondent be found guilty of violating the former Code of Professional Responsibility, Disciplinary Rules 1-102(A)(4) (conduct involving dishonesty) and 6-101(A)(3) (neglect of a legal matter).
On count two, the referee found that respondent agreed to provide legal services to a client and was paid a retainer. Respondent was expected to clear the title to land held by an estate. The client made clear that there was a limited time in which the work had to be done. Respondent caused delays and later demanded an additional fee to complete the matter. The referee recommended that respondent be found guilty of violating Disciplinary Rule 6-101(A)(3) (neglect of a legal matter).
On count three, the referee found that respondent, after being retained to provide legal services, failed to return telephone calls, failed to keep appointments, and failed to pursue the matter referred to him by the clients. The referee recommended that respondent be found guilty of violating Disciplinary Rules 6-101(A)(3) (neglect of a legal matter) and 7-101(A)(2) (failure to carry out a contract of employment).
The Florida Bar and the respondent submitted to the referee a joint recommendation on discipline. The referee adopted it and accordingly recommends that respondent be suspended from the practice of law for thirty days. We approve the referee’s report and order attorney Herbert P. Sapp, Jr., suspended from the practice of law for thirty days. Pursuant to rule 3-5.1(h), respondent must provide notice of this suspension “to all of his clients with matters pending” in his practice. As respondent has already been suspended in separate proceedings, this suspension shall take effect immediately and run concurrently with the other suspension.
The costs of this proceeding are taxed against the respondent. Judgment for costs in the amount of $1,537.22 is hereby entered against Herbert P. Sapp, Jr., for which sum let execution issue.
It is so ordered.
McDonald, C.J., and OVERTON, EHRLICH, SHAW, BARKETT, GRIMES and KOGAN, JJ., concur.