|Florida follows the ABA Model Rule format. The numbers of the rules correspond directly, however, Florida places a 4- before each rule number. Thus, Rule 5.1 becomes Florida Rule 4-5.1|
statutes are available on line at www.leg.state.fl.us
Florida's Supreme Court rules and opinions are available on line at www.floridasupremecourt.org
Cases in green can be found on www.plol.org
|Click on the links. If it is blue, it is a link. Please report broken links.|
|This information is for educational purposes only. Do not rely on these cases as being the most recent cases. They are here to teach or illustrate a point of law only.|
|Confidentiality||Conflicts of Interest||Competence & Negligence|
The Supreme Court of Florida regulates the discipline of attorneys. Fla. Const., art. V, § 15; Pantori v. Stephenson, 384 So. 2d 1357 (Fla. 1980).
Short case and a truly great footnote on the ineffective nature of attorney discipline. Johnnides v. Amoco Oil Co., 778 So. 2d 443, 444 n.2 (Fla. 3d DCA 2001)
The Bar only admits people of good integrity. Florida Bd. of Bar Examiners Re: O.C.M, No. SC02-2195 (Florida Supreme Court, 2003)
Disbarred lawyers may work as paralegals in Florida. Florida Board of Bar Examiners Re: McMahan, 944 So.2d 335 (2006) but don't do drugs.
Amendments to the
Florida Registered Paralegal Program- 969 So.2d 360 (2007)
Lawyer's failure to properly supervise his paralegal. Rule 3-5.1 Florida Bar v. Lawless, 640 So. 2d 1098 (Fla. 1994).
.2006 Amendments to the
Rules Regulating the Florida Bar (search "duty of
confidentiality" in Florida jurisdiction
Civil liability for disclosing client confidences. Elkind v. Bennett, 958 So.2d 1088 (2007)
Really thorough opinion on a disqualification of a firm that hired a paralegal from opposing counsel. Proper screening = no disqualification. Steward v. Bee-Dee Neon & Signs, Inc., 751 So.2d. 196 (2000)
|.Are legal malpractice suits assignable? Not usually. Here's an exception. Cowan, Liebowitz & Latman v. Kaplan, SC03-59 (FL 3/17/2005) (Fl. 2005)|
|UPL||UPL/Misrepresentation||Attorney/Client Privilege||Advertising/Solicitation||Client Trust Accounts|
Article on UPL from the Florida Bar Journal 1999 Very thorough!
Lay advocate in Exceptional Student Education due process hearings is not UPL. The UPL Committee found that Rule 6A-6.03311, Florida Administrative Code allows non-lawyer advocates to act as qualified representatives and to appear on behalf of clients in ESE hearings. (2005)
Florida Bar v. Neiman, 816 So.2d 587 (Fla. 2002) Twenty-one examples of UPL!
Code Section 90.502
Allstate Indemnity Co. v. Ruiz, 899 So.2d 1121 (Fla. 2005) Work product privilege does not protect insured's file in a bad faith case against the insurer.
Waiver of the privilege. In re Target Technology Company LLC (Fed. Cir. 2006, Non-Precedential) 2006 U.S. App. LEXIS 26240
|A tornado of solicitation! Florida
Bar v. Wolfe, 759 So.2d 639 (2000) (This case also discusses
referral fees to nonlawyers)
Amendments to Rule Regulating the Bar - Advertising, 971 So.2d 763 (2007)
|Fair Fees||Paralegal Fees||Intimate Relations with Clients||Drug/Alcohol Abuse||Pro Bono|
v. Chertoff 2008 US Supreme Court recovery of paralegal fees
Paralegal time is not a reimbursable cost, but should be included in attorney time. Demedrano, Labor Finders, Case No. 1D06-6122 Fla. 1st Dist. Ct. App. 05/13/09)
Civil Practice & Procedure Code 57.104 Computation of attorneys' fees.--In any action in which attorneys' fees are to be determined or awarded by the court, the court shall consider, among other things, time and labor of any legal assistants who contributed nonclerical, meaningful legal support to the matter involved and who are working under the supervision of an attorney
Florida Bar v. Bryant (Fla. 2002)
Also search: Impaired Attorneys and the Disciplinary System + Florida
Roughly 15 percent of Florida Bar members will develop a problem with alcohol or drugs during their career.
pro bono + florida
See also floridaprobono.org
|Special Duties of the Prosecutor||Overly Zealous Conduct||Misc.
|.Out of control prosecutor: Cardenas v. Florida||
Sharing fees with a paralegal. Bonus based on firm income violates 4-5.4(a)(4) but is enforceable by the paralegal. Patterson v. Law Office of Goldstein, 980 So.2d 1234 (2008)
|.||Please report broken links|