THE FLORIDA BAR, PETITIONER,
v.
JOHN V. BAUM, 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 petitioned for temporary suspension of attorney John V. Baum for misappropriating approximately $21,100 from client trust accounts and law firm funds. The Florida Supreme Court granted the petition and suspended Baum from practice, imposing strict conditions on his handling of client funds and case files pending further proceedings.
The court granted The Florida Bar's petition for temporary suspension of Baum from the practice of law. The suspension precludes Baum from accepting new cases but permits him to continue representing existing clients for the first thirty days, subject to strict conditions regarding trust fund handling and client notification. Baum has no right to reclaim cases or files already transferred to other firm members or other Florida Bar members.
[1] Misappropriation of client funds by an attorney constitutes grounds for temporary suspension from the practice of law.
[2] An attorney's consent to suspension pending investigation can be a factor in granting a petition for temporary suspension.
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“Mr. Baum is causing great public harm by misappropriating funds to his own use, and that the best interest of the public would be served by the immediate temporary suspension of Mr. Baum from the practice of law.”
Establishes the basis for temporary suspension—protection of the public from an attorney misappropriating client funds.
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceBaum, a member of the law firm Brock, Massey, Walden, Baum and Eaton, misappropriated approximately $21,100 from the firm's trust and general accounts…
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 Misappropriation Of Funds cases and more on FLexlaw
PER CURIAM.
The Florida Bar has filed a petition for temporary suspension of John V. Baum from the practice of law pursuant to Rule 11.10(5), Article XI, of the Integration Rule of The Florida Bar. In its petition, The Bar alleges:
“1. The filing of this petition has been authorized by the Executive Director of The Florida Bar. “2. The affidavit of William L. Colbert, chairman of the Eighteenth Judicial Circuit Grievance Committee ‘A,’ attached hereto as Exhibit ‘1,’ shows that Mr. Baum has misappropriated money from his law firm’s trust and general accounts, as well as money received directly from clients, in the total amount of $21,100. Mr. Colbert’s affidavit includes his statement that he believes that John V. Baum is causing great public harm by misappropriating funds to his own use, and that the best interest of the public would be served by the immediate temporary suspension of Mr. Baum from the practice of law.
“3. The affidavit of Newman D. Brock, Gary E. Massey, Franklin T. Walden and O. H. Eaton, Jr., the surviving partners of the law firm of Brock, Massey, Walden, Baum and Eaton, attached hereto as Exhibit ‘2,’ sets forth specific examples of misappropriations of funds by Mr. Baum. The affidavit includes the affiants’ assertion that Mr. Baum is causing great public harm by misappropriating funds to his own use and that the best interest of the public would be served by his immediate suspension from the practice of law.
“4. Respondent, John V. Baum, is causing great public harm by misappropriating funds to his own use.
“5. The respondent, John V. Baum, has submitted his consent to suspension pending investigation, and it is attached hereto as Exhibit ‘3.’
“7. The Bar has also been advised that Mr. Baum’s partners have covered all known shortages in the firm’s trust account.”
Having carefully examined the petition and accompanying affidavits demonstrating Baum’s misconduct, we hereby grant the petition of The Bar requesting temporary suspension of Baum from the practice of law. It is, therefore, ordered that:
1. Respondent be and is hereby suspended from the practice of law in this state until further order of this Court.
2. Respondent is enjoined from withdrawing any trust funds now on deposit with any bank as provided in Rule 11.10(5) of Article XI of The Florida Bar Integration Rule until further order of this Court.
3. Respondent shall immediately notify in writing all banks in which he maintains accounts of the provisions of his suspension, and respondent shall provide said banks with a copy of this order. Respondent shall also provide staff counsel of The Florida Bar with a copy of the notice that he sends to each bank.
4. Respondent shall deposit into a trust account all sums hereafter received from the practice of law, whether fees, costs, deposits, or trust funds, and respondent shall immediately advise staff counsel of The Florida Bar of the receipt and location of such funds. 5. Respondent shall furnish a copy of his suspension order to all clients whom he, himself, is representing in matters pending and shall furnish staff counsel with an affidavit listing the names and addresses of clients so notified.
6. Although Rule 11.10(5), Article XI, Integration Rule, provides:
“Any order of temporary suspension issued under this rule shall preclude the attorney accepting any new cases but shall not preclude him continuing to represent existing clients during the first thirty days after issuance of such temporary order; . . .
this does not mean that respondent has the right to reclaim any cases or files which have already been turned over to other members of the firm of which he was a member or that have been turned over to other members of The Florida Bar. It is so ordered.
OVERTON, C. J., and BOYD, ENGLAND, SUNDBERG, HATCHETT and KARL, JJ., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
THE Florida BAR v. Baum, 369 So. 2d 585 (Fla. 1979)…agreed in the plea, if accepted by the court, that the period of suspension will be deemed to have commenced on February 10, 1978 which is the date of the Supreme Court’s order in The Florida Bar v. John V. Baum, Case No. 53,262 which is reported at 355 So. 2d 429 (Fla.1978). 6. If this Conditional Guilty Plea is an acceptable disposition of this case to the court, The Florida Bar respectfully suggests the court may dispose of the case without the need for additional proceedings below through an appropriate…
-
THE Fla. BAR. In re John v. Baum, 453 So. 2d 404 (Fla. 1984)…ee concerning Baum’s petition for reinstatement as a member in good standing of The Florida Bar. We have jurisdiction. Art. V, § 15, Fla. Const. Baum was temporarily suspended from the practice of law on February 10, 1978. The Florida Bar v. Baum, 355 So. 2d 429 (Fla.1978). In a final disciplinary judgment, Baum was suspended for two years with reinstatement conditioned upon proof of rehabilitation. The Florida Bar v. Baum, 369 So. 2d 585 (Fla.1979). He became eligible to apply for reinstatement in 1980. Ba…