THE FLORIDA BAR, COMPLAINANT,
v.
JACK CHAMPLIN, 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 disciplinary sanctions against attorney Jack Champlin for accepting a $300 legal fee for title clearance services, failing to perform the work, and refusing to return the money or respond to client inquiries. The court suspended Champlin from practice for three months and imposed conditions requiring rehabilitation and restitution.
Champlin violated Article XI, Rule 11.02 of the Integration Rule of The Florida Bar, Canon 11 of the Canons of Professional Ethics, and Rules 1 and 27 of Additional Rules Governing the Conduct of Attorneys in Florida. The court suspended him from practice for three months and imposed conditions requiring rehabilitation and restitution to former clients.
“the respondent received $300.00 as a fee for legal services to be performed and costs. This was paid to respondent in connection with clearing title to real property in Hillsborough County, Florida. Respondent did nothing to accomplish the legal services and has failed to return the money.”
Establishes the core facts of professional misconduct: acceptance of fee without performance and refusal to return money
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceOn April 30, 1965, Champlin received $300 as a fee for legal services and costs related to clearing title to real property in Hillsborough County, 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 Costs Of Proceedings cases and more on FLexlaw
The judgment of the Board of Governors ■ of The Florida Bar, entered in this disciplinary proceeding on -November 30, 1966 .and. filed in this court December S, 1966, with record, evidence and all proceedings had herein, came on to be reviewed by this . court.
■ The report and order of the Board of Governors are as follows:—
“The evidence shows and the referee has found that on April 30, 1965, the respondent received $300.00 as a fee for legal services to be performed and costs. This was paid to respondent in connection with clearing title to real property in Hillsborough County, Florida. Respondent did nothing to accomplish the legal services and has failed to return the money. He has ignored numerous letters and telephone calls requesting information on the status of the title proceeding.
“The referee found the respondent guilty of violating Article XI, Rule 11.02 of the Integration Rule of The Florida Bar [31 F.S.A.], Canon 11 of the Canons of Professional Ethics [31 F.S.A.] and Rules 1 and 27 of Additional Rules Governing the Conduct of Attorneys in Florida [31 F.S.A.]. The referee recommended that respondent be suspended from the practice of law for a period of one year.
“The Board approves and adopts the Referee’s findings of fact and his recommendation that respondent be found guilty. However, after thorough review of the record, the Board modifies the recommended disciplinary action. Accordingly, it is
“ORDERED and ADJUDGED that Respondent, Jack Champlin, be suspended from the practice of law for a period of three months and thereafter until he shall show rehabilitation, make restitution to his former clients and that respondent pay the costs of these proceedings in the amount of $155.92.”
We have carefully reviewed the record, including report of the referee, statement by respondent in opposition to the findings and recommendations of the referee, and judgment of the Board of Governors. . No request has been made for further proceed*216ings by respondent, and after consideration it is
Ordered that the judgment of the Board of Governors of The Florida Bar, dated November 30, 1966, that respondent, Jack Champlin, is guilty of unprofessional conduct as charged, that he be suspended from the practice of law for a period of three months and thereafter until he shall show rehabilitations and make restitution, and that he pay the cost of the proceedings in the amount of $155.92, be, and the same is, approved and adopted as the judgment of this court. Execution is hereby directed to issue for the costs assessed against respondent.
ROBERTS, Acting C. J., and DREW, O’CONNELL, CALDWELL and ERVIN, JJ-, concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
THE Florida BAR v. Rolle, 661 So. 2d 301 (Fla. 1995)…istent with that imposed by this Court in similar cases. We disagree and find the recommended discipline appropriate. See, e.g., Florida Bar v. Fath, 368 So. 2d 357 (Fla.1979); Florida Bar v. Knapp, 219 So. 2d 41 (Fla.1969); Florida Bar v. Champlin, 195 So. 2d 215 (Fla.1967); Florida Bar v. Rose, 187 So. 2d 329 (Fla.1966). We note that a private reprimand has failed to deter Rolle from this misconduct in the past.1 Accordingly, we approve the recommended discipline. Leon Rolle is hereby suspended from the pr…
-
THE Florida BAR v. Champlin, 222 So. 2d 185 (Fla. 1969)…e same is approved and adopted as the judgment of this Court. Execution is hereby directed to issue for the costs against respondent. It is so ordered. ERVIN, C. J., and ROBERTS, DREW, CARLTON and BOYD, JJ., concur. . The Florida Bar v. Champlin, 195 So. 2d 215 (Fla.1967).…
-
THE Florida BAR v. Weil, 373 So. 2d 659 (Fla. 1979)…., and ADKINS, SUND-BERG, HATCHETT and ALDERMAN, JJ., concur. . The Florida Bar v. Zyne, 248 So. 2d 1 (Fla.1971). . The Florida Bar v. Hendrickson, 222 So. 2d 1 (Fla.1969). .State v. Bass, 106 So. 2d 77 (Fla.1958). . The Florida Bar v. Champlin, 195 So. 2d 215 (Fla.1967). . The Florida Bar v. Pahules, 233 So. 2d 130 (Fla.1970).…