THE FLORIDA BAR, COMPLAINANT,
v.
JOHN MONTGOMERY GREENE, 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 John Montgomery Greene for federal income tax violations. The Supreme Court affirmed the Board of Governors' finding of guilt but reduced the recommended six-month suspension to one year of probation with reporting requirements, finding the referee's recommendation more appropriate given Greene's guilty plea, prior community service, and the limited nature of the criminal conduct.
The Court adopted the referee's recommended sanction rather than the Board of Governors' harsher suspension, placing Greene on probation for one year with conditions that he file required tax documentation and make monthly reports to The Florida Bar, and ordering that publication of the opinion serve as sufficient reprimand.
[1] A prolonged and knowing course of illegal conduct warrants a severe sanction in attorney disciplinary proceedings.
[2] A referee's recommendation for discipline, based on hearing testimony and examining evidence, may be deemed more appropriate than a Board of Governors' recommendation in…
Previewing 2 of 4 headnotes on this case. FLexlaw’s editorially structured points of law — every proposition, pinpointed — are reserved for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence“a prolonged and knowing course of illegal conduct such as this is deserving of a more severe sanction”
States the Board of Governors' rationale for imposing a six-month suspension rather than accepting the referee's milder recommendation
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceGreene failed to file certain federal income tax returns and failed to pay approximately $85,000 in income taxes. He pled guilty to two separate misde…
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 matter on November 26, 1969, was filed in this court December 2, 1969 together with the record, evidence and all proceedings held theretofore. Upon petition for review filed by the respondent this court heard oral argument of the parties.
The report and order of the Board of Governors is as follows:—
“This cause came on for review by the Board of Governors of The Florida Bar upon the report of its referee. The referee found that respondent had failed to file certain income tax returns; that he failed to pay some $85,000 in income taxes; that he was convicted upon his plea of guilty to the charge of failure to file tax returns (U.S.C. see 7203) and that he was sentenced to prison because of said crimes.
“The respondent pled guilty and the referee received evidence in mitigation of punishment. The Board is aware of respondent’s record of service to church and country and his generally favorable reputation, except for this criminal conviction. The referee recommended a private reprimand and a period of probation upon stated conditions.
“This Board finds that a prolonged and knowing course of illegal conduct such as this is deserving of a more severe sanction. Accordingly, it concurs in the referee’s findings of guilt and directs that respondent be suspended from the practice of law for six months from the effective date of this judgment and thereafter until payment of costs herein in the amount of $45.08.”
The recommendation of discipline by the referee is as follows:—
“It is recommended that the respondent be administered a private reprimand in accordance with Rule 11.07(1) of the Integration Rule [32 F.S.A.], and that he be placed upon probation for a period of one year to commence as of November 1, 1969; that the condition of the probation include that he file a report with The Florida Bar on April 15, 1970, that he has filed his income tax return for the previous year and that he has paid all income taxes due the Federal Government thereon and that he report monthly to The Florida Bar during the period of probation the amounts he has paid during the previous month to the Federal Government on the income tax, penalties and interest due the Federal Government for the years 1964 and 1965 and the balance owed thereon after such payments based upon his agreement with the Federal Government providing for the payment thereof.”
We have carefully reviewed the record, briefs and reports and have heard the arguments in open court and conclude that the punishment recommended by the Referee, who heard the testimony and examined all of the evidence, is more appropriate in this proceedings. Cf. The Florida Bar v. Rousseau, 219 So.2d 682 (Fla.1969). Respondent pled guilty and was convicted of two separate misdemeanors under Title 26, Section 7203, United States Code, for failure to file his own federal income tax return. The complaint and record show no other crime or unethical' conduct was involved and respondent has served a sentence in the federal prison for these misdemeanors. We feel that it would serve no useful purpose to further punish respondent by his suspension from the practice of law or to subject him to further reprimand, therefore it is
Ordered that respondent be placed upon probation for a period of one year from date hereof, and the publication of this *9opinion shall be deemed to be. sufficient reprimand; further that respondent make reports as hereinabove recommended by the Referee; and pay the costs of these proceedings.
It is so ordered.
ERVIN, C. J., and ROBERTS and CARLTON, JJ., concur.
DREW, J., concurs specially with opinion.
THORNAL, J., dissents with opinion.
(concurring specially).
While I dissented in Rousseau, I feel bound by that decision. In the interest of uniform punishment for charges of this type, I therefore concur in the foregoing decision.
(dissenting).
I would affirm the judgment of the Board of Governors or alternatively extend the period of probation for a time not less than five years.
I therefore dissent.
DREW, Justice
(concurring specially).
While I dissented in Rousseau, I feel bound by that decision. In the interest of uniform punishment for charges of this type, I therefore concur in the foregoing decision.
THORNAL, Justice
(dissenting).
I would affirm the judgment of the Board of Governors or alternatively extend the period of probation for a time not less than five years.
I therefore dissent.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
THE Florida BAR v. Greene, 589 So. 2d 281 (Fla. 1991)…2d 35 (Fla.1990); The Fla. Bar v. Greene, 529 So. 2d 1103 (Fla.1988); The Fla. Bar v. Greene, 515 So. 2d 1280 (Fla.1987); The Fla. Bar v. Greene, 485 So. 2d 1279 (Fla.1986); The Fla. Bar v. Greene, 463 So. 2d 213 (Fla.1985); The Fla. Bar v. Greene, 235 So. 2d 7 (Fla.1970). He has completely disregarded lesser forms of discipline imposed by this Court. He has failed to abide by conditions of probation. He has continued to practice law despite his suspension. We have found disbarment appropriate in other cas…
-
THE Florida BAR v. Greene, 463 So. 2d 213 (Fla. 1985)…rusted to him). In determining the appropriate discipline, the referee considered respondent’s prior disciplinary history of a public reprimand and one year of probation for two misdemeanor income tax convictions in 1970, The Florida Bar v. Greene, 235 So. 2d 7 (Fla.1970), and a private reprimand for neglect in 1980. The referee recommended (1) that respondent receive a public reprimand and one year of probation with quarterly caseload reports to be submitted to The Florida Bar; (2) that respondent refund,…
-
THE Florida BAR v. Greene, 515 So. 2d 1280 (Fla. 1987)…ight be prone or tempted to become involved in like violations. Greene has been disciplined several times in the past. In 1970, he received a public reprimand and one-year probation for failing to file income tax returns, The Florida Bar v. Greene, 235 So. 2d 7 (Fla. 1970), and was privately reprimanded in 1980 for neglect of a legal matter. In 1985, he received a one-year probation and public reprimand for neglecting a legal matter entrusted to him. The Florida Bar v. Greene, 463 So. 2d 213 (Fla.1985). Th…
Authorities Cited
- THE Florida BAR v. Rousseau, 219 So. 2d 682 (Fla. 1969)