THE FLORIDA BAR, COMPLAINANT,
v.
FRANCES SEAMAN CHILDERS, 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 referee's recommendation to suspend attorney Frances Childers from the practice of law for 90 days for improperly depositing a $950 firm check into her personal savings account, rejecting the Florida Bar's request for a three-year suspension based on mitigating circumstances.
The court upheld the referee's recommendation of a 90-day suspension rather than the Florida Bar's requested three-year suspension, finding that the mitigating evidence—including the attorney's acknowledgment of error, full cooperation, first offense status, remorse, strong character references, and absence of harm to the firm or clients—warranted the lesser penalty despite the seriousness of diverting firm funds.
[1] Diverting a law firm's funds constitutes a serious professional violation.
[2] A ninety-day suspension from the practice of law may be warranted for improperly handling a firm's check, especially when mitigating factors are present.
Previewing 2 of 5 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“diverting a firm's funds is a serious professional violation”
Establishes the severity of the conduct at issue and the court's recognition that such misconduct is fundamentally serious
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceChilders, an attorney employed by a state agency, deposited a $950 check made out to her but belonging to her law firm into her personal savings accou…
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 Mitigating Factors In Sentencing cases and more on FLexlaw
PER CURIAM.
The Florida Bar petitions for review of a referee’s recommendation that Childers be suspended from the practice of law for ninety days. We have jurisdiction. Art. V, § 15, Fla.Const. We approve the referee’s report and recommendations.
The bar filed a complaint against Child-ers for depositing a $950 check made out to her, but belonging to her law firm, in her personal savings account. After hearing the matter, the referee recommends both that Childers be found guilty of handling this check improperly and that she be suspended for ninety days. The bar, on the other hand, argues that Childers should be suspended for three years.
As the bar points out, diverting a firm’s funds is a serious professional violation. The referee acknowledged this principle and, in light of the mitigating evidence presented on Childers’ behalf, found a ninety-day suspension warranted. After studying this record, we agree with the referee’s recommendations. Childers acknowledged her error and cooperated fully in these proceedings. This is her first offense, for which she expressed remorse, and she presented testimonials from several people who found her action in this instance totally out of character and a one-time unexplainable aberration. Neither her former firm nor any of its clients suffered any harm from this incident, and, as the referee pointed out, the only person hurt by her conduct was Childers, herself.
Therefore, we hereby suspend Frances S. Childers from the practice of law for a period of ninety days. Childers is employed by a state agency, and her suspension will be effective thirty days from the date this opinion is filed to provide for the orderly reassignment of her duties. Judgment for costs of $1,309.18 is hereby entered against Childers, for which sum let execution issue.
It is so ordered.
SHAW, C.J., and OVERTON, McDonald, barkett, grimes, KOGAN and HARDING, JJ., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
THE Florida BAR v. Ward, 599 So. 2d 650 (Fla. 1992)…appropriate punishment for lawyers who intentionally steal client funds, Schiller, 537 So. 2d at 993, this Court has not applied that presumption in cases where lawyers have stolen money outside a client context. See, e.g., The Fla. Bar v. Childers, 582 So. 2d 617, 618 (Fla.1991) (90-day suspension for attorney who deposited a check which belonged to law firm in her personal savings account); The Fla. Bar v. Farver, 506 So. 2d 1031, 1032 (Fla.1987) (one-year suspension for attorney who intentionally deprived…
-
THE Florida BAR v. Cyrus A. COX, 655 So. 2d 1122 (Fla. 1995)…600 So. 2d 457, 459 (Fla.1992). Further, we find that Cox’s misconduct is consistent with other disciplinary cases where suspensions have been imposed. For example, in Florida Bar v. Stalnaker, 485 So. 2d 815 (Fla.1986), and Florida Bar v. Childers, 582 So. 2d 617 (Fla.1991), we suspended the attorneys for ninety days for diverting client fees which were intended for the law firm to their own personal accounts. In another case, Florida Bar v. Bradham, 446 So. 2d 96 (Fla.1984), the attorney was suspended for t…
-
THE Florida BAR v. Carswell, 624 So. 2d 259 (Fla. 1993)…y suspension is appropriate because this isolated act of misconduct was totally out of character and perpetrated during an intense, emotional time. Carswell relies on this Court’s holdings in Poplack, 599 So. 2d 116, and The Florida Bar v. Childers, 582 So. 2d 617 (Fla.1991). Poplack, who also had a good professional reputation, was given a thirty-day suspension for an isolated incident of lying to a police officer. Poplack, 599 So. 2d at 117-19. Additionally, Childers received a ninety-day suspension for the…