THE FLORIDA BAR, COMPLAINANT,
v.
ARTHUR B. KRAMER, 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 disbars an attorney for serious misconduct involving felonies and dishonesty, finding a three-year suspension inadequate.
[1] An attorney's knowing disposal of entrusted property in an unlawful manner, involving a substantial risk of loss or detriment to the owner, constitutes illegal conduct in…
[2] An attorney's knowing utterance of a false affidavit with the purpose to deceive or injure parties connected to a property transaction constitutes conduct involving disho…
Previewing 2 of 4 headnotes on this case. FLexlaw’s editorially structured points of law — every proposition, pinpointed — are reserved for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceThe respondent attorney pled guilty to felonies in New Jersey involving unlawful disposal of entrusted property and uttering false affidavits. The Flo…
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 Disbarment cases and more on FLexlaw
PER CURIAM.
This disciplinary proceeding is before the Court for consideration of a referee’s report filed pursuant to Rule 3-7.6 of the Rules Regulating The Florida Bar. We have jurisdiction. Art. V, § 15, Fla. Const. On April 5, 1988, the respondent, Arthur B. Kramer, pled guilty in New Jersey, to knowingly disposing of property entrusted to him in a manner which he knew was unlawful and involved a substantial risk of loss or detriment to the rightful owner, a third-degree felony, and one count of knowingly uttering a false affidavit with the purpose to deceive and/or injure parties connected to the purchase and sale of property, a fourth-degree felony. The respondent was adjudicated guilty of these counts. The Florida Bar filed a complaint based on this misconduct and the respondent has defaulted at every stage of the proceedings.
The referee recommended that the respondent be found guilty of violating Disciplinary Rules 1-102(A)(3) (proscribing illegal conduct involving moral turpitude); 1-102(A)(4) (proscribing conduct involving dishonesty, deceit, fraud, or misrepresentation); and 1-102(A)(6) (proscribing other conduct adversely reflecting on an attorney's fitness to practice law). We approve this portion of the referee’s report.
The referee recommended that the respondent be suspended from the practice of law for a period of three years. We believe however, that disbarment is the appropriate discipline for such grave misconduct. The respondent has been found guilty of converting a client’s property for his own use and then concealing that fact with false affidavits. This conduct cannot be condoned, and a three-year suspension is not adequate discipline.
Accordingly, we hereby disbar Arthur B. Kramer, effective immediately. The Florida Bar’s costs in this proceeding are taxed against the respondent. Judgment is entered against Arthur B. Kramer in the amount of $150.00, 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
-
THE Florida BAR v. Karten, 829 So. 2d 883 (Fla. 2002)…ic in his name.6 This Court’s case law supports disbarment. See, e.g., Florida Bar v. Fitzgerald, 541 So. 2d 602, 606 (Fla.1989) (disbarment ordered where attorney misappropriated trust funds and betrayed interests of client); Florida Bar v. Kramer, 548 So. 2d 233, 233 (disbarment ordered where attorney converted client’s property for own use and then concealed the conversion). Moreover, our analysis of what occurred in this case is that Karten blatantly engaged in self-dealing conduct for his own selfish be…
-
THE Florida BAR v. McSHIRLEY, 573 So. 2d 807 (Fla. 1991)…ore egregious. By settling cases without client consent or knowledge, Shuminer committed fraud on his clients in addition to misappropriating funds for his personal use. Such conduct certainly deserves disbarment. See also The Florida Bar v. Kramer, 548 So. 2d 233 (Fla.1989) (conversion of client property and then concealing that fact with false affidavits warrants disbarment). We do not imply that the continued misappropriation of client funds, standing alone, may not warrant disbarment. Without significant…