THE FLORIDA BAR, COMPLAINANT,
v.
E. PAUL BRIGMAN, 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 E. Paul Brigman for multiple ethical violations including concurrent conflicting representation, accepting fees without performing work, mishandling client funds, and failing to communicate with clients in a case. The Florida Supreme Court approved the referee's findings and suspended Brigman from practice for six months pending successful rehabilitation.
Brigman engaged in serious ethical misconduct across four separate matters. Although individual offenses were not severe in isolation, the aggregate pattern constituted serious breach of ethics. The court approved suspension from practice for six months pending successful reinstatement proceedings.
[1] An attorney commits misconduct by representing conflicting interests without client knowledge.
[2] An attorney commits misconduct by accepting payment for services and then failing to perform or communicate with the client.
Previewing 2 of 6 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“Although individually the offenses were not of great magnitude, in the aggregate they constituted a serious breach of ethics.”
The court's rationale for treating cumulative ethical violations as serious misconduct despite each individual violation being relatively modest.
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceBrigman was charged with six disciplinary violations across separate matters. The referee found him guilty of four counts: representing estate benefic…
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 For Client Funds cases and more on FLexlaw
PER CURIAM.
This disciplinary proceeding by The Florida Bar against E. Paul Brigman is before us on complaint of The Florida Bar and Report of the Referee. The Referee’s report and record of the proceedings were duly filed with this Court pursuant to Rule 11.06(9) (b) of the Integration Rule of The Florida Bar. Respondent has not filed a petition for review pursuant to Rule 11.09, Integration Rule.
The respondent was charged with a six-count disciplinary violation stemming from a series of separate incidents. All matters were consolidated for hearing. The Referee dismissed two of the six counts against respondent but found him guilty of misconduct for: (1) accepting representation of beneficiaries of an estate while concurrently advising the executor of the estate, with whom the beneficiaries had a controversy, without the knowledge of his clients; (2) accepting $500.00 to procure a divorce for a client, thereafter doing nothing, and refusing to discuss the matter with his client ; (3) receiving funds from a client in a real estate closing in July of 1970 and refusing until February of 1971 to account for these funds; (4) accepting representation in an accident case for out-of-town clients, failing to communicate with them, and subsequently entering a voluntary dismissal of their cause without informing the clients.
The Referee found that the evidence presented on each of these four charges clearly established misconduct by the respondent. Although individually the offenses were not of great magnitude, in the aggregate they constituted a serious breach of ethics. In determining the appropriate punishment, he further considered the total recalcitrance of the respondent, including his refusal to appear for the hearing, as well as the absence of redeeming circumstances. He recommended the following discipline:
“ . . . [T]hat the Respondent be suspended from the practice of law in Florida for a period of six (6) months and thereafter until he shall satisfactorily prove his rehabilitation in a reinstatement proceeding.”
The findings and recommendations of the Referee are hereby approved, and the respondent is hereby suspended from the practice of law under the terms and conditions of the Referee’s recommendations. See Rule 11.09(3) (f), Integration Rule of The Florida Bar. Execution is hereby directed to issue against respondent in the amount of $732.-28 for costs of these proceedings.
It is so ordered.
ADKINS, C. J., and ROBERTS, ERVIN, McCAIN and OVERTON, JJ., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
THE Florida BAR v. Brigman, 322 So. 2d 556 (Fla. 1975)…. We further direct that a copy of this order be personally served on the respondent by an officer authorized by law to serve process. It is so ordered. ADKINS, C. J„ and ROBERTS, BOYD, OVERTON and ENGLAND, JJ., concur. . Florida Bar v. Brigman, 307 So. 2d 161 (Fla.1975). . Id. at 162.…
-
THE Florida BAR v. Abrams, 402 So. 2d 1150 (Fla. 1981)…o withdraw therefrom without good cause, conflict of interest, and misrepresentation to a court. A series of acts of misconduct which in aggregate constitute a serious breach of ethics warrant sterner sanctions. See The Florida Bar v. Brigman, Fla., 307 So. 2d 161 (1975). The findings and recommendations of the referee are hereby approved, and respondent is hereby suspended from the practice of law for one year, and thereafter until he shall prove his rehabilitation as provided in rule 11.10(3). The suspensi…
-
THE Florida BAR v. Brigman, 405 So. 2d 983 (Fla. 1981)…rs in which he undertook representation. Florida Bar v. Brigman, 299 So. 2d 7 (Fla. 1974). In 1975 the Court suspended Brig-man for six months after his being found guilty on four counts of a six-count disciplinary complaint. Florida Bar v. Brigman, 307 So. 2d 161 (Fla.1975). A later order commanded him to show cause why he should not be held in contempt of this Court for violation of that suspension order. Respondent admitted various violations but pleaded ignorance of the requirements violated, showing as e…