THE FLORIDA BAR, COMPLAINANT,
v.
CHARLES R. KNAPP, 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 Charles R. Knapp for accepting a retainer to probate a will and manage stock transfers but failing to perform these services for two years while misrepresenting his progress to the client. The court suspended him from practice for three months and indefinitely thereafter until he could demonstrate rehabilitation, finding him incapable of practicing law.
Knapp was found guilty of violating Article XI, Rule 11.02(3)(a), Canon 11 of the Canons of Professional Ethics, and Rules 1 and 27 of the Additional Rules Governing the Conduct of Attorneys in Florida. He was suspended from practice for three months and thereafter until he demonstrates rehabilitation and proves his mental and physical capability to practice law.
“Respondent gave Mrs. Kuber the impression that he was probating the will and transferring the stock, when, in fact, he had not done so for a period which ran for two years.”
Establishes the core misconduct of misrepresenting services performed and retaining funds for an extended period without completion.
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceKnapp accepted a retainer from Mrs. Nellie J. Kuber to probate her deceased husband's will and transfer stock to her name. He subsequently asked for a…
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 Canons Of Professional Ethics cases and more on FLexlaw
The following are the pertinent portions of a Judgment entered in these disciplinary proceedings by the Board of Governors of The Florida Bar on November 22, 1968:
“The referee found that the respondent accepted a retainer from Mrs. Nellie J. Kuber to probate the will of her deceased husband, Henry C. Kuber, and to transfer stock to her name under the provisions of the will. Subsequent to this Mrs. Kuber gave additional funds to respondent when he told her he ‘needed money’. Respondent gave Mrs. Kuber the impression that he was probating the will and transferring the stock, when, in fact, he had not done so for a period which ran for two years. The will, the stocks and funds were returned to Mrs. Kuber simultaneously with the filing of respondent’s Answer in this case.
“In addition, the referee found, on the basis of respondents statements, that the respondent is not now mentally and/or physically capable of practicing law.
“The referee recommended respondent be found guilty as charged in the Bar’s Complaint and particularly of violation of Article XI, Rule 11.02(3) (a) and Canon 11 of the Canons of Professional Ethics and Rules 1 and 27 of the Additional Rules Governing the Conduct of Attorneys in Florida [32 F.S.A.]. The referee recommended that respondent be suspended from the practice of law for three months and thereafter until he is mentally and physically capable of practicing law and that he pay the costs of these proceedings. The Board of Governors shares the referee’s concern and agrees with his finding of guilt and discipline. It is, therefore,
“ORDERED and ADJUDGED that Charles R. Knapp be suspended from the practice of law for three months and thereafter until he shows rehibilitation and that he pay the costs of these proceedings in the amount of $104.50.”
The time within which respondent may file a Petition for Review in this Court having expired and Court having duly considered the record and foregoing judgment, it is
Ordered and adjudged that the respondent, Charles R. Knapp, be suspended from the practice of law in this State for three months from the date this order is filed in the Clerk’s office and thereafter until he establishes by an appropriate proceeding before the Board of Governors and this Court his entitlement to be allowed to resume the practice of law in this State.
It is further ordered that The Florida Bar do have and recover of the respondent, Charles R. Knapp, its costs expended herein in the sum of $104.50, for which let execution issue.
It is so ordered.
DREW, Acting C. J., and THORNAL, CARLTON, ADKINS and BOYD, JJ., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
THE Florida BAR v. Rolle, 661 So. 2d 301 (Fla. 1995)…er claims that the recommended discipline is inconsistent 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 di…