THE FLORIDA BAR. IN RE LEWIS M. WILLIAMS
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.
Lewis M. Williams, a lawyer suspended from The Florida Bar in 1979 for drug and weapons convictions, petitioned for reinstatement in 1986. The Florida Supreme Court affirmed the referee's recommendation to deny reinstatement, finding Williams failed to demonstrate adequate rehabilitation.
Williams failed to meet his burden of showing that the referee's report denying reinstatement was unsupported by the evidence. The Court approved the referee's report and denied Williams' reinstatement petition. The Court also reduced the cost assessment from $5,356.34 to $1,957.20 by excluding investigative costs not authorized under the applicable rule.
[1] A petition for reinstatement to membership in The Florida Bar may be denied when the referee finds that rehabilitation has not been satisfactorily shown.
[2] A petitioner seeking to overturn a referee's report in a bar reinstatement proceeding must demonstrate that the report is unsupported by the evidence.
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 referee found that rehabilitation was not satisfactorily shown.”
States the core basis for denying reinstatement—failure to demonstrate adequate rehabilitation
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceWilliams was suspended from The Florida Bar on February 13, 1979, for multiple felony convictions including conspiracy, possession and sale of cocaine…
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 Attorney Reinstatement cases and more on FLexlaw
PER CURIAM.
This proceeding is before the Court on the petition of Lewis M. Williams for reinstatement to membership in The Florida Bar. The referee recommended that reinstatement be denied. Williams has filed a petition for review. We have jurisdiction. Art. Y, § 15, Fla. Const. Williams was suspended from membership in The Florida Bar on February 13, 1979, for multiple felony convictions including conspiracy, possession and sale of cocaine, and possession of two concealed firearms. He filed his petition for reinstatement on November 6, 1986.
The referee found that rehabilitation was not satisfactorily shown. In his report, he explained that Williams: (1) failed to furnish his clients with copies of the suspension order and failed to furnish The Florida Bar with an affidavit containing the names and addresses of those clients; (2) allowed his trust account to stay open and active following suspension; (3) unlawfully hired a private investigator to locate and interview both the jurors and the confidential informant regarding his trial; (4) continued his involvement after suspension with persons directly and indirectly involved in criminal activity; and (5) made inconsistent comments concerning his involvement in the drug offenses.
Williams argues that he has undergone a great deal of rehabilitation since his release from incarceration. Williams presented numerous witnesses who testified that he is a knowledgeable attorney, a good attorney, and an honest man to whom they would refer clients upon reinstatement.
To support reversal of the referee’s report, Williams must show that the report is unsupported by the evidence. We find that Williams has failed to meet this burden. Further, we reject Williams’ argument that The Florida Bar in re Inglis, 471 So. 2d 38 (Fla.1985), and The Florida Bar re Whitlock, 511 So. 2d 524 (Fla.1987), support his reinstatement petition. We find these cases are clearly distinguishable from the instant case.
After careful consideration of the referee’s report, the record, and the briefs of the parties, we approve the referee’s report and the petition for reinstatement is denied.
The referee also recommended that Williams be required to pay the costs of $5,356.34 incurred in this proceeding. Williams correctly argues that rule 3-7.9(d) of the Rules Regulating The Florida Bar does not authorize the collection of investigative costs, which in this case totaled $3,399.14. See The Florida Bar v. Allen, 537 So. 2d 105 (Fla.1989). Therefore, judgment is entered against Lewis M. Williams for costs in the amount of $1,957.20, for which sum let execution issue. Interest shall accrue and be payable at the statutory rate beginning thirty days after the final judgment in this case.
It is so ordered.
EHRLICH, C.J., and OVERTON, SHAW, BARKETT, GRIMES and KOGAN, JJ., concur. McDONALD, J., concurs with the denial of reinstatement and dissents as to the investigative costs.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
THE Fla. BAR re Dennis Michael Janssen, 643 So. 2d 1065 (Fla. 1994)…ule 3-7.10(d) of the Rules Regulating the Florida Bar does not authorize the collection of investigative costs in reinstatement proceedings, and thus he should not be assessed $1,919.59 in investigative costs. We agree. See The Fla. Bar re Williams, 538 So. 2d 836, 837-38 (Fla.1989). Therefore, judgment is entered against Jans-sen for costs in the amount of $1,394.39, for which sum let execution issue. It is so ordered. GRIMES, C.J., OVERTON, SHAW, KOGAN and HARDING, JJ., and McDONALD, Senior Justice, concu…
-
The Fla. Bar re Amendments to Rules Regulating the Fla. Bar, 644 So. 2d 282 (Fla. 1994)…osts of the referee and attorneys for The Florida Bar.” Thus, the rule currently does not permit the assess [*284] ment of other costs such as investigative expenses. See The Fla. Bar re Janssen, 643 So. 2d 1065 (Fla.1994); The Fla. Bar re Williams, 538 So. 2d 836 (Fla.1989). We have added subdivision (o) to permit the assessment of the same taxable costs that may be assessed in a disciplinary proceeding before a referee, as provided by amended rule 3-7.6(o). Accordingly, the rules are amended and adopted as…
-
THE Fla. BAR. In re Herman Cohen, 560 So. 2d 785 (Fla. 1990)…imony of several witnesses who said that he is of good moral character and demonstrable professional ability and integrity. To support reversal of the referee’s report, Cohen must show that the report is unsupported by the evidence. In re Williams, 538 So. 2d 836, 837 (Fla.1989). After careful consideration of the referee’s report, the record, and the briefs of the parties, we find that Cohen has failed to meet this burden. We approve the referee’s report. Accordingly, Cohen’s petition for reinstatement is…
Authorities Cited
- THE Fla. BAR IN RE Charles K. Inglis, 471 So. 2d 38 (Fla. 1985)
- THE Florida BAR v. Allen, 537 So. 2d 105 (Fla. 1989)
- THE Fla. BAR Re William E. Whitlock, III, 511 So. 2d 524 (Fla. 1987)