THE FLORIDA BAR, COMPLAINANT,
v.
SAMUEL BENSON BERGER, RESPONDENT

Fla. | 1978-04-05
No. 51513
OVERTON, C. J., and BOYD, ENGLAND, SUNDBERG and KARL, JJ., concur., HATCHETT, J., concurs in part and dissents in part with an opinion.
358 So. 2d 14 Florida Supreme Court (1978) 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 brought disciplinary proceedings against attorney Samuel Benson Berger for violations of the Code of Professional Responsibility, including mishandling client funds, making statements questioning his fitness to practice, forgery, and mishandling real estate transactions. The Florida Supreme Court upheld the referee's recommendation and suspended Berger from practice for one year, requiring him to demonstrate rehabilitation before resuming practice.


Holding

The Court upheld the referee's findings and recommendations, suspending Berger from the practice of law for one year and thereafter until he demonstrates rehabilitation and fitness to practice. The Court also required Berger to comply with the referee's other recommendations regarding resolution of complaints, filing quarterly trust account statements, and payment of costs.


Headnotes

[1] A member of the bar who fails to file a required brief in support of a petition for review may have their request for oral argument denied.

[2] A referee's findings in a disciplinary proceeding are presumed to be supported by sufficient evidence.

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

Key Quotes

“Disciplinary proceedings, under Article XI of the Integration Rule, were initiated by the Bar against Berger. He was charged with four counts of violations of the Code of Professional Responsibility.”

Establishes the four charges brought against Berger in the disciplinary proceeding

Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.

Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence

Facts & Procedural History

Berger was charged with four counts of violations: (1) failure to properly account for client monies and withdrawal from a case after discharge; (2) s…

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.

The Florida Bar has filed a complaint in this Court against Samuel Benson Berger, one of its members. Following a hearing before a Bar referee it had been recommended that Berger be suspended from the practice of law. Improperly, Berger filed a Notice of Appeal from the recommendation and the referee’s report. The Bar moved to dismiss the appeal or to give Berger an extension of time to file the proper papers. The alternative motion was granted by order of this Court. The order expressly required Berger, if he wanted review, to file a petition for review and a brief. Berger filed a petition requesting oral argument but he did not file the brief. For failure to conform to the Rules and our order, the request for oral argument is denied. We have considered Berger’s petition and find it to be meritless.

Disciplinary proceedings, under Article XI of the Integration Rule, were initiated by the Bar against Berger. He was charged with four counts of violations of the Code of Professional Responsibility. The first concerned his failure to properly account for monies entrusted to him by a client and to withdraw from a case after being discharged. The second involved statements made to the U. S. Secret Service which called into question his fitness to practice law. The third and fourth charged forgery and mishandling of real estate transactions. Berger admitted to the referee assigned to hear the matter guilt of each charge.

The referee reported that independent of Berger’s admissions there existed ample evidence of guilt as to each charge. He recommended that Berger be suspended from the practice of law for one year and after that time be allowed to resume practice only upon a showing of rehabilitation and fitness. Further, he recommended that Berger be ordered to resolve the complaints made to the Bar against him in a number of cases listed in the referee’s report; or that he enter binding arbitration as to all issues in the listed cases; and that he file quarterly statements with the Clerk of this Court accounting for monies or property held by him in trust in his name or in the name of D. or Dora Berger. There is sufficient evidence to support the referee’s findings and we think his recommendations are in the best interests of the public and the legal profession. We hereby suspend the respondent from the practice of law for one year and thereafter until he demonstrates rehabilitation and fitness to practice. We order, too, that respondent comply with the other recommendations made by the referee. Respondent is ordered to pay the costs of these proceedings in the amount of $656.90.

It is so ordered.

OVERTON, C. J., and BOYD, ENGLAND, SUNDBERG and KARL, JJ., concur. HATCHETT, J., concurs in part and dissents in part with an opinion.

Other
HATCHETT, Justice,

HATCHETT, Justice,

concurring in part, dissenting in part.

I concur with the majority in finding Berger guilty on Counts I and III, but I would find him not guilty on Count II (a criminal charge that never went to trial).

I would also suspend Berger for two years.


Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus


Citator

Cited By

  • THE Florida BAR v. Berger, 394 So. 2d 415 (Fla. 1981)
    …ounsel or in pro se. Respondent filed no brief in this Court. We also note, as did the referee, that respondent has a prior disciplinary record, having been suspended for a one-year period for a prior separate offense. See The Florida Bar v. Berger, 358 So. 2d 14 (Fla.1978). Although the prior suspension [*417] period has expired, respondent has not yet petitioned for readmittance and consequently remains suspended. It is hereby ordered that respondent is suspended from the practice of law for an additional…

Full citator, related cases, and AI research tools

Open in FLexlaw