THE FLORIDA BAR, COMPLAINANT,
v.
WILLIAM M. BURTON, JR., 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 upheld the disbarment of attorney William M. Burton, Jr. for misappropriating approximately $26,000 from two clients and failing to return the funds upon demand. Although the attorney made restitution to one client and arranged restitution to the other, the court found disbarment justified as a disciplinary measure to maintain public trust in the legal profession.
The court affirmed the disbarment judgment, finding it amply justified by the facts. The disbarment is for an indefinite period, but under the Integration Rules, Burton may apply for reinstatement after six months.
“Unless offending members of the Bar are properly disciplined, the members of the legal profession will never retain the trust of the people. The judgment of disbarment is certainly justified when an attorney misappropriates funds which he receives by virtue of his fiduciary relationship with his client.”
Establishes the court's rationale for upholding disbarment as necessary to maintain public trust and addresses the seriousness of fiduciary breach
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceRespondent Burton received approximately $26,000 from two clients and failed to return this money upon demand. He subsequently made complete restituti…
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 Misappropriation Of Funds cases and more on FLexlaw
The respondent has petitioned this Court for review of the Judgment of the Board of Governors of The Florida Bar ordering and adjudging that respondent “be disbarred from the practice of law in' Florida” and pay cost in the amount of $169.15. This Judgment was entered August 19, 1968.
The referee found that respondent received approximately $26,000.00 from two clients and failed to return this money upon demand. The referee recommended that respondent be suspended from the practice of law for two years upon the condition that full restitution be made or for such further time until full restitution is made.
Respondent contends that the Board of Governors failed or neglected to consider certain mitigating circumstances and that the penalty of disbarment is too severe.
The burden is upon respondent to show wherein the judgment is erroneous, unlawful or unjustified.1
Respondent has made complete restitution to one client and has made arrangements for restitution to the other. We have carefully examined the record, particularly in connection with the mitigating circumstances, and find the recommended judgment of disbarment is amply justified by the facts.
The judgment of disbarment should be construed as disbarment for an indefinite period of time.2 Under the provisions of this rule, no period of disbarment shall be for less than six months. At any time after six months the attorney has the right to apply for reinstatement of his membership in The Florida Bar.3
Unless offending members of the Bar are properly disciplined, the members of the legal profession will never retain the trust of the people. The judgment of disbarment is certainly justified when an attorney misappropriates funds which he receives by virtue of his fiduciary relationship with his client.
On the other hand, it is important that offending members who rehabilitate themselves are given an opportunity to return to their profession. This opportunity is reserved in the provisions of Rule 11.10 of the Integration Rule.
The Judgment of the Board of Governors is approved. It is thereupon ordered that respondent be disbarred from the practice of law in Florida retroactively effective from August 1968 and pay the cost of these proceedings in the amount of $169.15.
ERVIN, C. J., and THORNAL, ADKINS, BOYD and CALDWELL (Retired), JJ-, concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Adams v. State, 559 So. 2d 1293 (Fla. 3d DCA 1990)…ing the trial. Even if the comment was improper under Rule 3.451, it would not justify a new trial because it does not seriously affect the fairness of the trial as required by Atkins v. State, 210 So. 2d 9, 10 (Fla. 1st DCA 1968), cert. discharged, 218 So. 2d 748 (Fla.1969), cert. denied, 396 U.S. 859, 90 S.Ct. 128, 24 L.Ed.2d 111 (1969). For these reasons the trial court did not err by commenting on the jury’s ability to reach a decision. Adams next contends that the trial judge erred in failing to make an…
-
THE Florida BAR v. Iric Vonn Spears, 786 So. 2d 516 (Fla. 2001)…ling from a client must be among those at the very top of the list.”); Florida Bar v. Breed, 378 So. 2d 783, 784 (Fla.1979) (“The willful misappropriation of client funds should be the Bar’s equivalent of a capital offense.”); Florida Bar v. Burton, 218 So. 2d 748, 749 (Fla.1969) (“The judgment of disbarment is certainly justified when an attorney misappropriates funds which he receives by virtue of his fiduciary relationship with his client.”); State ex rel. Florida Bar v. Jarvis, 74 So. 2d 228 (Fla.1954) (e…
-
THE Florida BAR v. Heller, 248 So. 2d 644 (Fla. 1971)…le a substitute supersedeas bond is questionable. The existence of the contempt judgment and writ of attachment necessarily hindered him in the presentation of a defense. The circumstances of this case distinguish it from The Florida Bar v. Burton, 218 So. 2d 748 (Fla.1969), and The Florida Bar v. Champlin, 222 So. 2d 185 (Fla.1969). It is ordered that the respondent George M. Heller be suspended from the practice of law for a period of one year from the date of the filing of this opinion and thereafter unt…
Previewing 3 of 5 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence