THE FLORIDA BAR, COMPLAINANT-APPELLEE,
v.
GEORGE L. PINK, RESPONDENT-APPELLANT
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 affirmed the Board of Governors' recommendation for public reprimand against attorney George L. Pink for his mishandling of client trust funds in five separate matters. The Court rejected the respondent's argument that the Board improperly increased the discipline recommended by the referee, finding that the respondent's change in employment status rendered the probationary terms impractical.
The Court affirmed the Board's public reprimand, finding that the respondent's recent change from private practitioner to official of the Industrial Relations Commission made the recommended probationary terms impractical. The multiple offenses and change in employment status justified the Board's decision to impose public rather than private reprimand.
[1] An attorney's failure to promptly account for and disburse trust funds received on behalf of clients constitutes a disciplinary offense.
[2] The Board of Governors of The Florida Bar may increase disciplinary sanctions recommended by a referee, even if based on a stipulation, if circumstances warrant.
Previewing 2 of 5 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“The amounts of money withheld were not great, but the seriousness of the offense should be recognized.”
Establishes that while the quantum of funds was modest, the nature of the violation—improper handling of client trust funds—was serious
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligencePink received trust funds on behalf of clients in five separate cases but failed to promptly account for and disburse the funds according to clients' …
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 cases and more on FLexlaw
We have for consideration a judgment of the Board of Governors of The Florida Bar recommending disciplinary action against the respondent. This cause was initiated prior to institution of the new rules; see In re The Florida Bar, 225 So.2d 881 (Fla.1969).
The pertinent provisions of the judgment are as follows:
“The Florida Bar’s Complaint charges that respondent received trust funds on behalf of clients in five separate cases and that he has failed to promptly account for said funds and disburse them according to his clients’ directions. It should be observed that the respondent was most cooperative in these proceedings and counsel were able to stipulate to a great deal of the record.
“The amounts of money withheld were not great, but the seriousness of the offense should be recognized. Four of the charges involved mishandling of awards or settlements received by respondent’s clients in connection with automobile accident litigation. The fifth claim involved the proceeds of the sale of real estate which he handled as attorney for the executors of an estate. In each case the referee found that the respondent failed to properly handle such funds and to account to his clients. The referee did not find embezzlement or misappropriation of trust funds.
“The Board of Governors approves the findings of fact of the referee. It is unable to approve of the recommendation of the referee of a private reprimand to be followed by a period of probation and supervision of the respondent’s practice.
“Accordingly, the Board concurs in the referee’s findings of guilt and directs that this judgment of public reprimand be filed according to the Rule and that the respondent pay the costs of these proceedings in the amount of $529.50.”
Respondent has appeared before this Court with the argument that the Board of Governors was unjustified in increasing the discipline recommended by the referee since the recommended discipline was suggested by joint stipulation of counsel for the respondent and The Bar. However, we agree with the Board of Governors that respondent’s recent change of status from private practitioner to an official of the Industrial Relations Commission makes the recommended terms of probation impractical. The recommended discipline was for a public reprimand which *98was to be held in abeyance pending satisfaction of a strict probationary regimen; this regimen cannot now be administered. A different result might have obtained here had petitioner’s offenses not been so numerous.
The judgment appealed from is affirmed, and respondent is directed to bear the costs of these proceedings in the amount of $529.50. Publication of this opinion shall constitute sufficient reprimand.
It is so ordered.
ERVIN, C. J., THORNAL, CARLTON and BOYD, JJ., and MASON, Circuit Judge, concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
THE Florida BAR v. Welty, 382 So. 2d 1220 (Fla. 1980)…e an attorney failed to transmit to his client the proceeds of a settlement. The proceeds were not transmitted until disciplinary proceedings had been instituted. The Court approved a public reprimand. Respondent also cites The Florida Bar v. Pink, 236 So. 2d 97 (Fla.1970), where a public reprimand was given to the attorney for failure to properly account for trust funds and failure to disburse them according to his client’s direction. There was no embezzlement or misappropriation in this case. Respondent…
Authorities Cited
- In re THE Florida BAR, 225 So. 2d 881 (Fla. 1969)