THE FLORIDA BAR, COMPLAINANT,
v.
WILLIAM J. MULLINS, 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 Supreme Court approved a conditional guilty plea and disciplined attorney William J. Mullins, Jr. with a public reprimand and costs for neglecting a client's civil matter in violation of DR 6-101(A)(3).
An attorney who agrees to represent a client in a civil dispute but fails to take timely steps to pursue the matter violates DR 6-101(A)(3) and is subject to public reprimand and costs.
[1] An attorney's failure to take timely steps to pursue a civil matter on behalf of a client constitutes neglect of a legal matter under DR 6-101(A)(3).
Previewing 1 of 1 headnotes on this case. FLexlaw’s editorially structured points of law — every proposition, pinpointed — are reserved for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceRespondent William J. Mullins, Jr. agreed to represent a client in a civil dispute but failed to take timely steps to pursue the matter.…
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 Responsibility cases and more on FLexlaw
PER CURIAM.
This disciplinary proceeding is before the Court for consideration of the uncontested report of the referee.
By means of a conditional guilty plea for consent judgment, which was agreed to by The Florida Bar, respondent William J. Mullins, Jr., admitted that he had agreed to represent a client in a civil dispute and then failed to take timely steps to pursue the matter. The referee’s recommendations are set forth in the report as follows:
III. Recommendation as to Whether or Not the Respondent Should Be Found Guilty: I find that the respondent be found guilty of the following violations of the Code of Professional Responsibility: That William J. Mullins, has violated the following Disciplinary Rule, DR 6-101(A)(3) (neglect of a legal matter entrusted to him).
IV. Recommendation as to Disciplinary Measures to be Applied: I recommend that William J. Mullins be disciplined by a public reprimand to be published in the Southern Reporter, and pay all costs reasonably associated with this disciplinary proceeding. These costs to be paid within 30 days from the Order of the Supreme Court of Florida.
We approve the referee’s report. We hereby reprimand William J. Mullins, Jr., for professional misconduct. Judgment for costs in the amount of $586.52 is hereby entered against respondent, for which sum let execution issue.
It is so ordered.
EHRLICH, C.J., and OVERTON, McDonald, shaw, barkett, GRIMES and KOGAN, JJ., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By (151 total)
-
Maddox v. State, 760 So. 2d 89 (Fla. 2000)…prior case law allowing defendants to agree through a plea bargain to a sentence not specifically authorized by statute or rule as long as the sentence does not exceed the statutory maximum. See, e.g., King, 681 So. 2d at 1140; Quarterman v. State, 527 So. 2d 1380, 1382 (Fla.1988); Williams, 500 So. 2d at 503. D. Deviation from Oral Pronouncement of Sentence: Increased Length of Incarceration In a number of cases pending on review, the defendant claims that the written sentence is in error because it confli…
-
King v. State, 681 So. 2d 1136 (Fla. 1996)…at 548. While a trial court cannot impose an illegal sentence pursuant to a plea bargain, Williams v. State, 500 So. 2d 501, 503 (Fla.1986), it can impose a negotiated sentence that is not specifically authorized by statute. Cf. Quarterman v. State, 527 So. 2d 1380, 1382 (Fla.1988) (finding that defendant’s violation of plea agreement condition that he appear at sentencing was clear and convincing reason for departure sentence even though failure to appear for sentencing in and of itself was not valid reason f…
-
State v. Vaughn R. Simpson, 554 So. 2d 506 (Fla. 1989)…departure may not be based on offenses for which the defendant has not been convicted. Williams v. State, 500 So. 2d 501, 503 (Fla.1986) (citing Fla.R.Crim.P. 3.701(d)(11) (1986)) (“ Williams II”), receded from on other grounds, Quarterman v. State, 527 So. 2d 1380 (Fla.1988). Accordingly, the trial court in this instance has relied on improper factors in imposing a departure sentence based on timing. This error alone undermines the validity of the trial court’s conclusions, since the judge obviously misunder…
Previewing 3 of 151 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence