STATE OF FLORIDA EX REL. THE FLORIDA BAR, COMPLAINANT,
v.
JOSEPH L. WOLF, 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 successfully sought the disbarment of attorney Joseph L. Wolf for forging his client's endorsement on a $334 check and falsely uttering the forged instrument. The Florida Supreme Court approved the Board of Governors' recommendation to disbar Wolf and assess costs against him.
Wolf should be disbarred from the practice of law. The Court approved and adopted the Board of Governors' judgment finding Wolf guilty of the charges and recommending disbarment, and assessed costs of $107.25 against him.
“The complaint charged the respondent, a member of The Florida Bar, with forging an endorsement of his client to a check in the amount of $334 with intent to defraud; and with falsely uttering the same instrument.”
Establishes the specific misconduct charges brought against Wolf by the Florida Bar
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceWolf, an attorney and Florida Bar member, forged his client's endorsement on a check for $334 with intent to defraud and falsely uttered the forged in…
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 Uttering A Forged Instrument cases and more on FLexlaw
A complaint was filed by The Florida Bar against Joseph L. Wolf, respondent, an attorney at law, on September 21, 1960. The complaint charged the respondent, a member of The Florida Bar, with forging an endorsement of his client to a check in the amount of $334 with intent to defraud; and with falsely uttering the same instrument.
The respondent, on September 30, 1960, filed an answer to the complaint alleging that he had a power of attorney from his client but admitting all of the remaining allegations of the complaint. In accordance with the .integration rule of The Florida Bar, the matter was referred to a referee, who conducted a hearing and filed his report with the Board of Governors of The Florida Bar. It appears from the report that the respondent, having been duly notified of the hearing, stated through counsel that he desired to present no testimony in support of his answer. On the basis of the matters brought out at the hearing and the admissions of the respondent, the referee found that the respondent was guilty as charged in the complaint and recommended that he be disbarred. The respondent waived in writing his right to file a reply or answer to the report of the referee.
On October 17, 1960, the Board of Gov-' ernors filed with the clerk of this court its judgment, in which the referee’s findings of fact and recommendation of disbarment were approved and adopted. The Board of Governors also assessed against the respondent costs in the sum of $107.25.
More than thirty days having now elapsed since the filing with the clerk of this court of the judgment of the Board of Governors of The Florida Bar together with the transcript of evidence and other records in the cause, and no petition for review of said judgment having been filed, and this court having duly considered the record in the said cause and said recommendations, it is ordered that the judgment of the Board of Governors of The Florida Bar that the respondent, Joseph L. Wolf, be disbarred from the practice of law and that he pay costs of this proceeding in the sum of $107.-25, be and the same is hereby approved and adopted as the judgment of this court as provided by Article XI, Section 5(e), Integration Rule of The Florida Bar, 31 F.S. A.
Execution is hereby directed to issue for the costs assessed against the respondent.
THOMAS, C. J., and TERRELL, HOB-SON, ROBERTS and DREW, JJ., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Petition of Joseph L. Wolf, 257 So. 2d 547 (Fla. 1972)…eafter engaged in the practice of law, apparently as a sole practitioner, until April 11, 1939. At that time he was suspended for a period of five years. Subsequently, on December 7, 1960, petitioner was disbarred. State ex rel. Florida Bar v. Wolf, 124 So. 2d 867 (Fla.1960). Both the suspension and disbarment were based upon grounds of misappropriating funds of clients. Petitioner first asserts that the Referee improperly considered petitioner’s past disciplinary record, including the nature of the offense…