THE FLORIDA BAR, COMPLAINANT,
v.
C. J. BUDZINSKI, 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 disciplined attorney C. J. Budzinski for mishandling client funds and issuing dishonored checks. The Supreme Court affirmed the Board of Governors' finding of guilt but reduced the suspension from one year to six months, conditioning reinstatement on payment of defaults and demonstrated rehabilitation.
The Court affirmed the Board of Governors' finding of guilt for unethical conduct violating multiple Canons of Professional Ethics and Rules but reduced the penalty from a one-year suspension to a six-month suspension, conditioned on Budzinski's payment or satisfactory settlement of defaults and demonstration of rehabilitation.
“In September of 1965, Respondent betrayed the trust of a client, Alexander Bienkowski, and comingled the amount of $30.00 advanced Respondent for costs, and failed to account for the sum.”
Establishes the first instance of mishandling client funds through commingling and failure to account.
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceIn September 1965, Budzinski commingled $30.00 in client costs advanced by Alexander Bienkowski and failed to account for it, using the money personal…
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 Failure To Account For Client Funds cases and more on FLexlaw
This case is before the Court on petition of C. J. Budzinski, respondent, to review the judgment entered by the Board of Governors of The Florida Bar on June 4, 1968. Said judgment reads as follows:
“This cause came on for review and consideration by the Board of Governors of The Florida Bar upon the report of the referee and the record of proceedings before him.
“On the record the referee found the following:
I
“In September of 1965, Respondent betrayed the trust of a client, Alexander Bienkowski, and comingled the amount of $30.00 advanced Respondent for costs, and failed to account for the sum. The money was used for Respondent’s personal use as evidence by his endorsement, followed by that of the Cock-Tail Bar.
II
“The referee found that Respondent collected $228.40 for his client, Alexander Bienkowski, in settlement of a case and failed to promptly account for it. Later Respondent gave Bienkowski a check on Respondent’s trust account for the amount and the check was dishonored by the bank, due to insufficient funds.
III
“The referee found that during December of 1966, another check on Respondent’s trust account for $233.34, payable to Errands Unlimited (Rose Seiferth), a client, was repeatedly dishonored when presented to the bank for payment due to insufficient funds.
*109IV
“The referee found that Respondent had given checks to his secretary, Sara Page, which were dishonored because of insufficient funds, and failed to pay her a sum on a demand note, thereafter giving her a check for the sum demanded, $234.26, said check also being dishonored because of insufficient funds.
“Respondent was found guilty of these charges by the referee. In particular, he was found guilty of violations of Article XI, Rule 11.02(4) of the Integration Rule, Canons 11, 21, and 29, of the Canons of Professional Ethics, and Rules 1 and 30 of the Additional Rules Governing the Conduct of Attorneys in Florida. The referee recommended a one-year suspension from the practice of law, and payment of costs.
“The Board of Governors reviewed the report of the referee, together with the exibits and transcripts of testimony before him. The Board finds the respondent guilty as charged in paragraphs 3, 4, and 6 of the Complaint, and as found by the referee in the two Bienkowski charges and the Seiferth charge, items I, II, and III above. The Board agrees that respondent should be suspended for one year and pay the costs of this proceeding. In addition, the Board would have respondent show that he is rehabilitated at the end of his suspension period. Wherefore it is
“ORDERED AND ADJUDGED that the respondent be found guilty of unethical conduct and that he be suspended from the practice of law for a period of one year and thereafter until he shall demonstrate to this Board and the Supreme Court of Florida that he is rehabilitated. In addition, he shall pay the costs of this proceeding in the amount of $191.83.
“DONE and ORDERED this 4th day of June, 1968.”
This Court has examined the petition, the record, and the judgment of the Board of Governors and has heard argument of counsel for The Florida Bar, respondent having waived oral argument. We approve the finding of guilt but feel that the prescribed penalty is too severe. It is ordered that the respondent, C. J. Budzinski, is hereby suspended from the practice of law in Florida for a period of six (6) months from the date of the filing of this Order and thereafter until he shall have paid or made satisfactory settlement of the defaults committed by him and until he demonstrates his rehabilitation. Execution is hereby directed to issue for the costs against respondent hereby taxed at $191.83.
It is so ordered.
CALDWELL, C. J., THOMAS, ROBERTS and ERVIN, JJ., and SPECTOR, District Judge, concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
THE Florida BAR v. Davis, 361 So. 2d 159 (Fla. 1978)…1972); The Florida Bar v. Kelly, 269 So. 2d 362 (Fla.1972); The Florida Bar v. Hill, 265 So. 2d 698 (Fla.1972); The Florida Bar v. Parsons, 238 So. 2d 644 (Fla.1970); The Florida Bar v. Dingle, 235 So. 2d 479 (Fla.1970); The Florida Bar v. Budzinki, 217 So. 2d 108 (Fla.1968); The Florida Bar v. Charles, 201 So. 2d 713 (Fla.1967); The Florida Bar v. Baxter, 178 So. 2d 699 (Fla.1965); and The Florida Bar v. Hill, 132 So. 2d 170 (Fla.1961). The only case to specifically discuss moral turpitude in connection with…
-
THE Florida BAR v. Budzinski, 220 So. 2d 897 (Fla. 1969)…[*898] PER CURIAM. The respondent in the case of Florida Bar v. Budzinski, opinion filed December 18, 1968, 217 So. 2d 108, and in The Florida Bar v. C. J. Budzinski, #38,296, is the same. In the first decision a final judgment was entered suspending respondent from the practice of law for a period of six months, the suspension to run from December 18, 1968. Respondent…
-
THE Florida BAR v. Budzinski, 228 So. 2d 897 (Fla. 1969)…PER CURIAM. The respondent, C. J. Budzinski, has, pursuant to the requirements of the judgment of this Court in The Florida Bar v. Budzinski, 217 So. 2d 108 (Fla. Dec. 18, 1968) and The Florida Bar v. Budzinski, 220 So. 2d 897 (Fla. Apr. 2, 1969) filed in this Court his statement that he has complied with said judgment and has attached to said statement photostatic copies of receipts, the originals of w…