THE STATE OF FLORIDA EX REL. THE FLORIDA BAR, COMPLAINANT,
v.
WILLIAM B. GRIFFITH, 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 reviewed a Board of Governors recommendation to suspend attorney William B. Griffith for unprofessional conduct. The Court adopted the Board's recommendation, imposing a one-year suspension that could be withheld if Griffith made restitution to the complainant and submitted to probation.
The Court suspended Griffith from the practice of law for one year. However, if Griffith made restitution of the rebates to the complainant in a sum agreed upon by counsel and submitted proof to the Court, the suspension would be withheld and Griffith would instead be placed on probation for two years with specific reporting requirements.
“We have examined the record and find the judgment below to be free from error.”
The Court's affirmation that the Board of Governors' finding of unprofessional conduct was supported by the record.
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceGriffith was charged with unprofessional conduct under Article Eleven of The Florida Bar Integration Rule. The charge involved rebates that Griffith r…
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 Unprofessional Conduct cases and more on FLexlaw
PER CURIAM.
This is a petition to review a judgment and recommendation of the Board of Governors of The Florida Bar in The State of Florida ex rel. The Florida Bar, vs. William B. Griffith, the charge against Griffith being that of unprofessional conduct, prosecuted pursuant to Article Eleven of the Integration Rule of The Florida Bar. The pertinent part of the recommendations of the Board of Governors is as follows:
“1. The Board of Governors recommends that the Respondent, William B. Griffith, be suspended from the practice of law for a period of one year. “2. The Relator further recommends that, should the Respondent^make restitution to the complainant, Johnye E. Stotts, of the rebates received by the Respondent from -Dr. Irwin Leinbach and Lars Peterson, said one year’s suspension be withheld, and the Respondent placed on probation for a period of two years commencing on the date when proof of said restitution is filed in the Supreme Court of Florida.
“Dated this 21 day of January, 1957.”
The petition and return of respondent were filed in this court March 11, 1957. April 15, 1957, respondent, by counsel, advised the court that he did not desire the cause to be set for oral argument but would submit it for final disposition on the record. Petitioner further advised the court that “he is willing to abide by recommendation of the Board of Governors of The Florida Bar but he desires that the terms of probation be clearly defined.”
We have examined the record and find the judgment below to be free from error. The respondent is, therefore, suspended from the practice of law for the period of one year. If he makes restitution of the rebates received from Dr. Irwin Leinbach and Lars Peterson, in a sum agreed on by counsel for both sides, such suspension may be withheld and respondent placed on probation for a period of two years from the date restitution was made and proof thereof sworn to and presented to this court. If respondent makes restitution and goes on probation, then he shall make report of his conduct with proof thereof to the Senior Judge of the Circuit Court of his circuit on the first Monday of each quarter during the period of his probation. Copy of said reports shall be promptly filed with the clerk of this court under oath of respondent.
TERRELL, C. J., and THOMAS, HOB-SON, ROBERTS, DREW, THORNAL and O’CONNELL, JJ„ concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
THE Florida BAR v. Griffith, 204 So. 2d 729 (Fla. 1967)…dent. “The Board of Governors agrees with the recommendation of guilt. It does not agree with the recommendation of discipline in light of the entire record and the respondent’s past disciplinary history. (State ex rel. The Florida Bar v. Griffith, 95 So. 2d 408 [Fla.1957], State ex rel. The Florida Bar v. Griffith, 97 So. 2d 10 [Fla.1957]). Upon consideration, therefore, it is “ORDERED AND ADJUDGED that respondent, William B. Griffith, be suspended from the practice of law for three years and thereafter u…
-
The State of Fla. ex rel. The Fla. BAR v. Griffith, 97 So. 2d 10 (Fla. 1957)…[*11] PER CURIAM. It appearing that the respondent, William B. Griffith, has made restitution in the sum agreed upon by counsel for both sides, in compliance with the opinion of this court filed May 22, 1957, 95 So. 2d 408; that restitution was made on May 25, 1957, and proof of same filed in this court on May 29, 1957; It is, therefore, ordered that the suspension of the respondent is hereby terminated as of May 29, 1957; that he is placed on probation for a period…