THE FLORIDA BAR, PETITIONER,
v.
ANTHONY LIGGIO-MENDEZ A/K/A ANTHONY M. LIGGIO, RESPONDENT

Fla. | 1973-08-15
No. 43767
ROBERTS, Acting C. J., and ERVIN, ADKINS, BOYD and McCAIN, JJ., concur.
279 So. 2d 861 Florida Supreme Court (1973) Positive Treatment
Cited by 2 cases

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.

Synopsis

The Florida Bar petitioned the Florida Supreme Court to hold Anthony Liggio-Mendez in contempt for unauthorized practice of law. Liggio-Mendez advertised and provided legal advice regarding Dominican Republic divorces to Florida residents. The Court discharged the rule to show cause based on the respondent's admission of violations, commitment to cease the conduct, and cooperation with the Bar.


Holding

The Court discharged the rule to show cause without holding the respondent in contempt, based on his admission of the violations, his representation that he has ceased the conduct, and his commitment not to engage in such activities in the future.


Headnotes

[1] Offering services to obtain foreign divorces to the general public through newspaper advertisements constitutes the unauthorized practice of law.

[2] Providing legal counsel regarding the documentation, legality, and effects of foreign divorces within the state constitutes the unauthorized practice of law.

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

Key Quotes

“the Respondent, Anthony Liggio-Mendez, offered the services of obtaining 24-hour divorces in the Dominican Republic to the general public by newspaper advertisements in Dade and adjacent counties”

Description of the unauthorized practice of law charged by The Florida Bar

Previewing 1 of 2 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.

Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence

Facts & Procedural History

Anthony Liggio-Mendez, a non-licensed Florida resident, advertised 24-hour Dominican Republic divorces in newspapers in Dade County and adjacent areas…

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.


Opinion of the Court
PER CURIAM.

PER CURIAM.

On petition of The Florida Bar, this Court issued its order directing that the respondent, Anthony Liggio-Mendez, who is not a member of The Florida Bar, show cause on or before June 1, 1973, why he should not be held in contempt of this Court for the unauthorized practice of law in this State. Article V, Section 15, Florida Constitution, F.S.A. (formerly Article *862V, Section 23, Florida Constitution 1968); Article II, Section 2, Integration Rule of The Florida Bar, 32 F.S.A.

In its petition against unauthorized practice of law filed pursuant to Article XVI of the Integration Rule of The Florida Bar, The Florida Bar charged that respondent, a resident of Florida, engaged in unauthorized practice of law by the following acts:

“(a) That during the years of 1972 and 1973 the Respondent, Anthony Liggio-Mendez, offered the services of obtaining 24-hour divorces in the Dominican Republic to the general public by newspaper advertisements in Dade and adjacent counties.
(b) On more than one occasion Respondent, Anthony Liggio-Mendez, engaged in , the unauthorized practice of law by giving or offering to give legal counsel pertaining to the required documentation, legality, and effect on property and child custody of a Dominican Republic divorce within the State of Florida and within the United States.
(c) That on December 7, 1972, Respondent, Anthony Liggio-Mendez, did give legal counsel to Mrs. Angelico I. Lopez in a telephone conversation by advising her of what documents she would need to furnish in order to get a Dominican Republic divorce and also set a fee of $750 for obtaining such divorce.
(d) That on January 5, 1973, Respondent, Anthony Liggio-Mendez, did give legal counsel to Mrs. Angelico I. Lopez and a Florida Bar investigator in a personal interview at 3131 Ponce de Leon Boulevard, Coral Gables, Dade County, Florida, by informing them of the required documentation necessary to obtain a divorce in the Dominican Republic, advising them of the legal consequences of a Dominican Republican divorce on property settlements and alimony agreements in Florida and the United States, and the effect on a' prior agreement to support a mentally ill child in Michigan.
(e) That Respondent, Anthony Liggio-Mendez, provided a Florida Bar investigator with forms to obtain Power of Attorney from his wife in Michigan for her consent to obtain a divorce in the Dominican Republic and gave instructions in the use, filling out and the legal consequences thereof.
(f) That for all these services, Respondent, Anthony Liggio-Mendez, charged fees in various amounts.
(g) That the giving of legal counsel and advice by Respondent that foreign divorces are good and valid in all respects does cause grievous and irreparable injury to persons relying thereon.”

By letter following notice to show cause, respondent admitted the above violations, stated that he did not know that he was engaging in the unauthorized practice of law until February, 1973, when this was brought to his attention by the Assistant State Attorney of Broward County, stated that he will not engage in such activities within the State of Florida in the future, and requested this Court to issue its injunction restraining further violations of Article II, Section 2, of the Integration Rule of The Florida Bar, but prays that this Court not hold him in contempt.

Although acknowledging in his response to the Rule that he has committed the aforestated acts, respondent asserts that he has ceased such activities and will not engage in the same in the future. Accepting this statement of cooperation as true, we are satisfied that the Rule heretofore issued should be discharged, but without prejudice to further proceedings by The Florida Bar should any further activities constituting the unauthorized practice of law by respondent become known.

It is so ordered.

ROBERTS, Acting C. J., and ERVIN, ADKINS, BOYD and McCAIN, JJ., concur.


Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus


Citator

Cited By

  • THE Florida BAR v. Neadel, 297 So. 2d 305 (Fla. 1974)
    …in Florida while not being licensed to-practice law herein; and that the advice as related was of such magnitude and seriousness to warrant discipline of Respondent for the unauthorized practice of law, citing The Florida Bar v. Liggio-Mendez, Fla., 279 So. 2d 861, and Application of New York County Lawyers Association, 4 Misc.2d 728, 156 N.Y.S.2d 651; Kugler v. Haitian Tours, Inc., 120 N.J.Super. 216, 293 A. 2d 706. The referee recommended as follows: “It is the finding of the Referee that the activities o…

Full citator, related cases, and AI research tools

Open in FLexlaw