THE FLORIDA BAR, COMPLAINANT,
v.
PAUL S. CARR, 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 filed disciplinary charges against attorney Paul S. Carr. The referee found insufficient evidence to prove the charges by clear and convincing evidence and recommended each party bear its own costs. The only issue on appeal was whether the referee abused discretion in the cost allocation.
The taxation of costs is within the discretion of the referee and should not be reversed absent an abuse of discretion. No abuse occurred here because respondent affirmatively proposed the equal cost-sharing language to the referee and received exactly what he proposed. The court affirms that each party is responsible for its own costs.
[1] The taxation of costs in disciplinary proceedings is a matter within the discretion of the referee, and should not be reversed absent an abuse of discretion.
[2] A party who proposes that each party bear its own costs in a disciplinary proceeding cannot later claim an abuse of discretion when that proposal is adopted by the refere…
Previewing 2 of 3 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 taxation of costs is a matter within the discretion of the referee, and should not be reversed absent an abuse of discretion.”
Establishes the legal standard for reviewing cost allocation decisions in disciplinary proceedings
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceThe Florida Bar brought disciplinary charges against respondent attorney Paul S. Carr. The referee conducted proceedings and found that The Florida Ba…
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 Discipline cases and more on FLexlaw
PER CURIAM.
These disciplinary proceedings against respondent are before the Court on the complaint of The Florida Bar and the findings and recommendations contained in the referee’s report. We have jurisdiction pursuant to article V, section 15, of the Florida Constitution. Respondent petitions for review of the referee’s recommendation that each party be responsible for its own costs.
The referee found a failure to prove the charges filed against respondent by clear and convincing evidence, and found respondent not guilty. Neither The Florida Bar nor respondent seeks review of the referee’s findings of fact, and we approve those findings. The only issue on appeal is whether the referee abused his discretion in recommending that each party bear its own costs. Respondent argues that because The Florida Bar is customarily awarded costs in cases where a lawyer is disciplined, it follows that a lawyer who prevails against charges brought by the Bar should be awarded costs as a matter of right. We disagree. The taxation of costs is a matter within the discretion of the referee, and should not be reversed absent an abuse of discretion. Clearly there is no abuse in this instance where respondent failed to ask for costs before the referee. Indeed, he submitted a proposed report in which he suggested to the referee the following language, “I find that each party shall bear their own costs incurred herein,” which language was adopted verbatim by the referee. Respondent received exactly what he proposed to the referee.
Accordingly, we approve the referee’s recommendations, find respondent not guilty of the charges filed against him, and hold each party responsible for its costs.
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. Miele, 605 So. 2d 866 (Fla. 1992)…e approved. Moreover, a public reprimand is appropriate here and is also approved. The assessment of costs in a disciplinary proceeding is within the referee’s discretion and will not be reversed absent an abuse of discretion. The Fla. Bar v. Carr, 574 So. 2d 59 (Fla.1990). Miele argues that, because he has been partially vindicated, he should not be held liable for the total costs. This argument ignores the fact that, but for Miele’s misconduct, there would have been no complaint and, thus, no costs. We fi…
-
THE Florida BAR v. Cyrus Alan COX, 718 So. 2d 788 (Fla. 1998)…use he was partially vindicated. We disagree. The assessment of costs in a disciplinary proceeding is within the discretion of the referee, and this Court will not reverse the assessment in the absence of an abuse of discretion. Florida Bar v. Carr, 574 So. 2d 59, 59 (Fla.1990). The record in this case does not reveal the assessed costs to be unnecessary, excessive, or improperly authenticated. Thus, there was no abuse of discretion. In addition, but for Cox’s misconduct, there would have been no complaint f…
-
THE Florida BAR v. Lechtner, 666 So. 2d 892 (Fla. 1996)…l)(E). The Rules Regulating the Florida Bar give the referee the discretion to recommend an award of costs, and absent an abuse of discretion, the referee’s determination will be affirmed. See R. Regulating Fla. Bar 3-7.6(o)(2); Florida Bar v. Carr, 574 So. 2d 59 (Fla.1990). The rules do provide the referee some guidance in making a determination of whether to assess costs. For instance, Rule 3-7.6(o)(3) states: Assessment of Bar Costs. When the bar is successful, in whole or in part, the referee may assess…
Previewing 3 of 6 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence