THE FLORIDA BAR, PETITIONER,
v.
IRVING E. MILLER, 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.
Irving Miller, a Florida Bar member primarily engaged in real estate brokerage, challenged the automatic suspension rule for attorneys convicted of felonies. The Florida Supreme Court approved a stipulated 90-day suspension with automatic reinstatement rather than applying the indefinite suspension the Bar initially sought.
The Court approved the parties' stipulation for a 90-day suspension with automatic reinstatement, finding such discipline adequate under the unique circumstances of the case and rejecting the automatic indefinite suspension rule in favor of the negotiated resolution.
[1] An attorney convicted of a felony may seek suspension of the automatic suspension rule of The Florida Bar.
[2] A nolo contendere plea to filing a false income tax return constitutes a felony conviction for purposes of attorney discipline.
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“In view of the total circumstances and the unique nature of this case and in light of the above agreement of the parties, the Court considers the discipline to be adequate and approves the parties' stipulation.”
Establishes the Court's rationale for departing from automatic suspension rules and accepting the parties' agreed 90-day suspension.
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceMiller is a Bar member who practices law only occasionally and primarily works as a real estate broker. He was involved in business ventures with a fo…
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 Nolo Contendere Plea cases and more on FLexlaw
PER CURIAM.
Respondent, a member of The Florida Bar, brought this matter before the Court seeking an order suspending enforcement of Rule 11.07(3) of Article XI of the Integration Rule of The Florida Bar, providing for automatic suspension of attorneys convicted of felonies.
The record reflects that Respondent is primarily a real estate broker and, although a member of The Florida Bar, he practices only on rare occasions. Respondent was involved with his partner, a former agent for the Internal Revenue Service, in various business enterprises; Respondent asserts that he signed income tax returns prepared by his partner without knowledge of the violations alleged by the Government. Respondent entered a plea of nolo contendere to one violation of filing a false income tax return, which constitutes a felony. Petitioner-Florida Bar originally recommended a suspension of indefinite term, but at oral argument on Respondent’s “Petition to Modify and Terminate Suspension” attorneys for both parties indicated that they were willing to stipulate for a ninety-day suspension with automatic reinstatement.
In view of the total circumstances and the unique nature of this case and in light of the above agreement of the parties, the Court considers the discipline to be adequate and approves the parties’ stipulation.
Respondent is hereby suspended from the practice of law in Florida for a period of ninety days, at the expiration of which time he shall be automatically reinstated. The effective date of this suspension shall be September 22, 1975, the date on which the parties signed the above-mentioned stipulation.
It is so ordered.
ADKINS, C. J., and BOYD, OVER-TON, ENGLAND and HATCHETT, JJ., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
THE Florida BAR v. Lancaster, 448 So. 2d 1019 (Fla. 1984)…en though there had been no adjudication of guilt. The Florida Bar v. Bunch, 195 So. 2d 558 (Fla.1967). This Court has also disciplined an attorney who had pleaded nolo contendere and stipulated to a ninety-day suspension. The Florida Bar v. Miller, 322 So. 2d 502 (Fla.1975). Thus the important factor is not whether there has been an actual adjudication of guilt, but whether the attorney has been given a chance to explain the circumstances surrounding his plea of nolo contendere and otherwise contest the infe…
-
THE Florida BAR v. Pavlick, 504 So. 2d 1231 (Fla. 1987)…n effect for three years “[ujnless the Supreme Court permits an earlier application for reinstatement”). This Court has approved periods of suspension shorter than three years in cases involving nolo contendere pleas. See The Florida Bar v. Miller, 322 So. 2d 502 (Fla.1975) (ninety-day suspension). Furthermore, in cases which have involved similar misconduct, we have imposed lighter punishments than the discipline recommended here. See, e.g., The Florida Bar v. Pettie, 424 So. 2d 734 (Fla.1982) (one-year sus…
-
In re Fla. Bd. of BAR Exam'rs. In re H.H.S., 373 So. 2d 890 (Fla. 1979)…688 (Fla.1975), and, more recently, The Florida Bar v. Turner, 344 So. 2d 1280 (Fla.1977), each approving and imposing public reprimand as appropriate discipline upon conviction of failure to file tax returns. Further, in The Florida Bar v. Miller, 322 So. 2d 502 (Fla.1975), where the accused who was also a real estate broker was convicted of filing a false income tax return, a felony, this Court imposed a ninety-day suspension with automatic reinstatement at the end of the period. In The Florida Bar v. Sol…1 / 2