Tag Archive for: florida bar formal hearing

Speaker at St. Thomas School of Law

Attorney Lars K. Soreide, of the law firm Soreide Law Group, PLLC, was once again asked to speak at St. Thomas School of Law in Miami, FL, in March, 2011, to the first year law students.  Mr. Soreide was invited back to speak at St. Thomas University School of Law’s Distinguished Speaker Series to discuss the growing problem of law applicants getting called in for investigative and formal hearings by the Florida Board of Bar Examiners for financial mismanagement. Topics discussed included: credit card debt, bankruptcy, foreclosure, short sales, student loans and over all financial responsibility. Strategies for formally documenting a record of rehabilitation and how to work with your creditors was also discussed. This was followed by a questions and answer session where applicants could ask questions with their specific concerns. For a more detailed explanation they were directed to contact him through his website www.FloridaBarHearing.com.

The Soreide Law Group, PLLC,  represents those seeking admittance to the Florida Bar, and existing lawyers, for both investigative hearings and formal hearings in front of the Florida Bar. For more information about our services please visit: www.floridabarhearing.com or call (888) 760-6552.

LSAC Pre-Enrollment Programs

The Law School Admissions Council, LSAC, has compiled a list of  law schools that offer programs where pre-enrollment programs exist.   These are programs where admission to the law school is contingent upon the successful completion of a pre-enrollment program. Interested students should contact the law school for individual program eligibility and requirements.  This list was in effect as of 4-21-10.  Always check with the school, prior to enrolling in any program.

  • Appalachian School of Law
  • Campbell Law School
  • Charlotte School of Law
  • University of Detroit Mercy School of Law
  • University of District of Columbia David A. Clarke School of Law
  • Faulker University’s Thomas Goode Jones School of Law
  • Florida A&M University College of Law
  • Florida Coastal School of Law
  • Loyola University New Orleans School of Law
  • John Marshall Law School (Chicago)
  • Michigan State University College of Law
  • North Carolina Central University School of Law
  • Nova Southeastern University Shepard Broad Law Center
  • Ohio Northern Law School
  • Oklahoma City University School of Law
  • Phoenix Law School
  • Saint John’s University School of Law
  • Saint Louis University School of Law
  • Saint Mary’s University School of Law
  • Saint Thomas University School of Law (Miami)
  • Texas Southern University Thurgood Marshall School of Law
  • Whittier Law School
  • Widener University School of Law

The Soreide Law Group, PLLC,  represents those seeking admittance to the Florida Bar, and existing lawyers, for both investigative hearings and formal hearings in front of the Florida Bar. For more information about our services please visit: www.floridabarhearing.com or call (888) 760-6552.

SUMMARY OF UNLICENSED PRACTICE OF LAW CASES IN FLORIDA

 

In order to determine whether an activity constitutes the unlicensed practice of law, a two part analysis must be made.  First, it must be determined whether the activity is the practice of law.  The second question is whether the practice is authorized.  If an activity is the practice of law but the activity is authorized, the activity is not the unlicensed practice of law and may be engaged in by a nonlawyer.  The Florida Bar v. Moses, 380 So. 2d 412 (Fla. 1980).

The first question which must be addressed in order to determine whether a service or activity constitutes the unlicensed practice of law is to determine whether the activity constitutes the practice of law. In The Florida Bar v. Sperry, 140 So. 2d 587 (Fla. 1962), judg. vacated on other grounds, 373 U.S. 379 (1963) the Court found that setting forth a broad definition of the practice of law was “nigh onto impossible” and instead developed the following test to determine whether an activity is the practice of law:

…if the giving of (the) advice and performance of (the) services affect

important rights of a person under the law, and if the reasonable protection

of the rights and property of those advised and served requires that the

persons giving such advice possess legal skill and a knowledge of the law

greater than that possessed by the average citizen, then the giving of such

advice and the performance of such services by one for another as a course

of conduct constitute the practice of law.

When applying this test it should be kept in mind that “the single most important concern in the Court’s defining and regulating the practice of law is the protection of the public from incompetent, unethical, or irresponsible representation.”  The Florida Bar v. Moses, 380 So. 2d 412, 417 (Fla. 1980).

Although a codified definition does not exist, there is a large body of case law applying the Sperry test to determine whether a specific activity constitutes the unlicensed practice of law.  Therefore, although one cannot go to one particular source such as a dictionary for a definition, in most instances whether an activity constitutes the unlicensed practice of law can be found in case law.

Once it is determined whether an activity is the practice of law, it must be determined whether the Court or another body has authorized a nonlawyer to engage in the activity.  An activity may be authorized by court rule, case law, an administrative rule or a federal rule or statute.

What follows is a summary of what has been held to constitute the unlicensed practice of law in various circumstances.  Any authorized activities are also noted.  (Please note that the following is only a partial list of unlicensed practice of law cases.  There are over 230 reported unlicensed practice of law cases/opinions in Florida.)

1. ACCOUNTANTS  

Generally, it constitutes the unlicensed practice of law for an accountant, whether or not a CPA, to draft corporate documents.  Although the accountant may not draft the documents, the accountant may sell the forms necessary to establish a corporation and complete the forms with information provided in writing by the individual.  The Florida Bar v. Fuentes, 190 So 2d 748 (Fla. 1966); The Florida Bar v. Town,174 So. 2d 395 (Fla. 1965), The general rule and exception applies to all nonlawyers.

A CPA may represent individuals before the IRS in tax matters.  This practice is specifically authorized by 26 C.F.R. § 601.502 and C.F.R. Part 10.  As the activity is authorized by a federal rule, Florida may not enjoin the activity as the unlicensed practice of law.  The Florida Bar v. Sperry, 363 U.S. 379 (1963).

2.  ADMINISTRATIVE PRACTICE

In the Florida Bar v. Moses, 380 So. 2d 412 (Fla. 1980) the Supreme Court of Florida held that the legislature has the constitutional authorization to oust the Court’s responsibility to protect the public from the unlicensed practice of law in administrative proceedings under Article V, Section 1 of the Florida Constitution, and when it does so any “practice of law” conduct becomes in effect, authorized representation.  In other words, the legislature may authorize nonlawyer representation in administrative proceedings.  The activity is still the practice of law, it is merely authorized.  However, in order to do so, the agency must have a properly promulgated rule and the nonlawyer must follow the dictates of the rule.  The authorization is not blanket authority to appear in any proceeding but must be sought on a case-by-case and agency-by-agency basis.

3.  APPEARANCES PRO SE

The general rule is that an individual may appear pro se and represent themselves in court.  Fla. Stat. § 454.18.  This general rule does not apply to probate proceedings or to corporations.  In a probate proceeding, unless the individual attempting to appear pro se is the sole interested party in the matter, the individual must be represented by a member of The Florida Bar.  Rule 5.030, Probate and Guardianship Rules, Falkner v. Blanton, 297 So. 2d 825 (Fla. 1974).  A corporation, as a fictitious entity, may not appear pro se.  Szteinbaum v. Kaes Invecsiones Valores, 476 So. 2d 247 (Fla. 3d DCA 1985).  The general rule that a corporation may not appear pro se does not apply to small claims court as Rule 7.050 of the Small Claims rules specifically allows a corporation to appear pro se.  However, an exception exist for evictions.  In those cases, a corporation may not appear pro se and must be represented by an attorney.  Johnstown Properties Corp. v. Gabriel, 50 Fla. Supp. 138 (Fla Polk Cty. Court 1980).

4.  FEDERAL PRACTICE

Generally speaking, you must be a member of The Florida Bar in order to represent an individual in federal court.  In the area of federal administrative practice, if there is a rule or regulation which allows an attorney admitted in another state or a nonattorney to appear before the agency, Florida cannot enjoin the activity as the unlicensed practice of law.  The Florida Bar v. Sperry, 373 U.S. 379 (1963).  The activity is still the practice of law, it is merely authorized.  Whether the activity is allowed and the extent to which the individual may appear and/or practice will be governed by the rules of that particular agency.  If the agency does not have a rule allowing the practice, any representation would constitute the unlicensed practice of law.  The Fla. Bar re: Advisory Opinion – Nonlawyer Representation in Securities Arbitration, 696 So. 2d 1178 (Fla. 1997).

5.  HOUSE COUNSEL

An attorney licensed in a state other than Florida may work in Florida as Authorized House Counsel for a corporation if the attorney registers pursuant to Chapter 17 of the Rules Regulating The Florida Bar.  The activities which the Authorized House Counsel may perform are limited and do not include going to court.

6.  OUT-OF-STATE ATTORNEYS

An attorney admitted to the practice of law in a state other than Florida may not engage in the general practice of law in Florida or establish a law office in Florida.  An attorney licensed to practice law in a state other than Florida may establish an interstate practice in Florida only if the attorney follows the guidelines of The Florida Bar v. Savitt, 363 So. 2d 559 (Fla. 1978).  An attorney admitted to the practice of law in a state other than Florida may not appear in a Florida court as the representative of a party unless the attorney first seeks permission to appear pro hac vice pursuant to Rule 2.510 of the Florida Rules of Judicial Administration.  (It should be noted that this rule does not allow a resident of Florida to appear pro hac vice.)  Rule 4-5.5 of the Rules Regulating the Florida Bar describes the legal services in an out-of-state attorney can provide in Florida on a temporary basis.

7.  BANKRUPTCY

It constitutes the unlicensed practice of law for a nonlawyer to prepare bankruptcy forms for another.  The Florida Bar v. Catarcio, 709 So. 2d 96 (Fla. 1998).  This includes the petition and any necessary schedules.  However, the nonlawyer may sell blank forms necessary for a bankruptcy and complete the forms with information provided in writing by the individual.  The Florida Bar v. Brumbaugh, 355 So 2d 1186 (Fla. 1978).  It also constitutes the unlicensed practice of law for a nonlawyer to represent someone in bankruptcy court.  The Florida Bar v. Kaufman, 452 So. 2d 526 (Fla. 1984).

8.  DO-IT-YOURSELF LEGAL KITS AND BOOKS

Generally speaking, a nonlawyer may sell legal forms and kits and complete them with information provided in writing by the customer.  Florida Bar v. Brumbaugh, 355 So. 2d 1186 (Fla. 1978).  If the nonlawyer is using a Supreme Court Approved form, the nonlawyer may engage in limited oral communication to elicit the factual information that goes in the blanks of the form.  Rule 10-2.1(a), Rules Regulating The Florida Bar.

Generally speaking, it does not constitute the unlicensed practice of law for a nonlawyer to sell a book that contains general legal information.  New York County Lawyers Association v Dacey, 287 N.Y.S. 2d 422 (N.Y. 1967); 283 N.Y.S.2d 984 (N.Y. App. 1967).  The book may also contain legal forms.

9.  EVICTIONS

It constitutes the unlicensed practice of law for a nonlawyer to represent a third party in an eviction.  Generally speaking, a nonlawyer may not prepare evictions forms for another unless the nonlawyer is merely typing the information provided in writing by the individual or completing a Supreme Court Approved form with the factual information provided by the individual.  An exception exists for property managers.  In The Fla Bar re: Advisory Opinion Nonlawyer Preparation of Landlord Uncontested Evictions, 605 So. 2d 867 (Fla.1992), clarified, 627 So. 2d 485 (Fla.1993) the Court held that a property manager may sign and file complaints for evictions and motions for default in uncontested residential evictions for nonpayment of rent as long as the property manager is using a Supreme Court Approved form.

10.  FEDERAL PATENT PRACTICE

Title 37 C.F.R. §§10.1(1), 10.6, and 10.36 allow an attorney admitted in another state or a registered patent agent to prepare and file patent applications before the Office of Patent and Trademark.  The activity is the practice of law, it is merely authorized by federal regulation.  Therefore, under the dictates of The Florida Bar v. Sperry,  373 U.S. 379 (1963) Florida cannot enjoin the activity as the unlicensed practice of law.  However, the authorization granted by the federal regulations does not extend to actions in state court.  Vista Designs, Inc. v. Silverman, 774 So. 2d 884 (Fla. 4th. DCA 2001).

11.  FEDERAL TAX PRACTICE

Title 31 C.F.R. § 10 allows attorneys admitted in any state and some nonlawyers to represent individuals before the IRS.  Similar regulations exist for Tax Court.  The activity is the practice of law, it is merely authorized by federal regulation.  Therefore, under the dictates of The Florida Bar v. Sperry, 373 U.S. 379 (1963) Florida cannot enjoin the activity as the unlicensed practice of law.

Federal regulations also allow nonlawyers to prepare federal income tax returns for individuals.  Arguably, this activity is also the practice of law and merely authorized.

12.  GENEALOGISTS/HEIR HUNTERS

While “heir hunting” is generally allowed and would not be considered the practice of law, the heir hunter may not solicit heirs to recover part of the estate or file pleadings to do so.  The Florida Bar v. Heller, 247 So. 2d 434 (Fla. 1971).

13.  HOLDING OUT TO PERFORM LEGAL SERVICES

It constitutes the unlicensed practice of law for a nonlawyer to hold himself out as an attorney either expressly or impliedly.  This would include using the title Esquire (The Fla. Bar v. DeToma, 501 So. 2d. 599 (Fla. 1987)), using the initials J.D. if they are being used to solicit legal services (The Florida Bar v Catarcio, 709 So. 2d 96 (Fla 1998)), using “legal” in the name of your business (The Florida Bar v. Miravalle, 761 So. 2d 1049 (Fla. 2000)), using the title “attorney” or “lawyer” (The Florida Bar v Gordon, 661 So. 2d 295 (Fla. 1995)), and using any other title, such as notario publico, which holds the person out as being able to provide legal services (The Florida Bar v. Borges-Caignet, 321 So. 2d 550 (Fla. 1975)).  It also constitutes the unlicensed practice of law for a corporation to advertise to provide legal services even if the services are being performed by a member of The Florida Bar.  The Florida Bar v. Consolidated Business and Legal Forms, 386 So. 2d 797 (Fla. 1980).  This is due to the fact that a corporation may not practice law.

The Court has also held that it constitutes the unlicensed practice of law for a group of nonlawyers to hold themselves out as a panel of judges capable of granting divorces in Florida.  The Florida Bar v. Gentz, 640 So. 2d 1105 (Fla. 1994).

Rule 10-2.1(c) of the Rules Regulating The Florida Bar defines “nonlawyer” as including members of the bars of other states.  Therefore, the general case law regarding holding out applies to out-of-state attorneys as well.  However, if the attorney is part of a properly constituted interstate practice or is engaging in an authorized activity in Florida, the attorney’s title may appear on letterhead and business cards as long as necessary limiting language is also included.  The Florida Bar v. Kaiser, 397 So. 2d 1132 (Fla. 1981), The Florida Bar v. Savitt, 363 So. 2d 559 (Fla. 1978).

14.  IMMIGRATION

Title 8 C.F.R.  292 permits an attorney admitted in another state to represent individuals before the INS.  This permission does not extend to federal district court.  The activity is the practice of law, it is merely authorized by federal regulation.  Therefore, under the dictates of The Florida Bar v. Sperry, 373 U.S. 379 (1963) Florida cannot enjoin the activity as the unlicensed practice of law.

This authorization does not generally extend to nonlawyers.  (There are some very limited circumstances in which a nonlawyer may represent someone before INS such as on a one case basis for no fee.)  Nonlawyer representation of another in an immigration matter therefore constitutues the unlicensed practice of law.  The Florida Bar v. Matus, 528 So. 2d 895 (Fla. 1988), The Florida Bar v. Becerra, 661 So. 2d 299 (Fla. 1995), The Florida Bar v. Lopez, 231 So. 2d 819 (Fla. 1970).

15.  INDIVIDUAL REPRESENTATION

Generally speaking, a nonlawyer may not represent another in court.  An out-of-state attorney who wishes to represent someone in a Florida court must seek permission to appear pro hac vice in order to do so.  Rule 2.510 Fla.R.Jud.Admin. A nonlawyer may be able to represent another individual in an administrative proceeding if the agency has a properly promulgated rule allowing the activity.  The Florida Bar v. Moses, 380 So. 2d 412 (Fla. 1980).  On a related note, the Court has held that it constitutes the unlicensed practice of law for a nonlawyer to represent an individual in a securities arbitration matter.  The Florida Bar re: Advisory Opinion – Nonlawyer Representation in Securities Arbitration, 696 So. 2d 1178 (Fla.1997).

16.  INSURANCE ADJUSTERS

Florida Statute §626.854 sets forth the definitions and prohibitions on the activities of public adjusters.  Basically, a public adjuster may represent an insured in negotiations with their own insurance company on matters involving property damage.  The public adjuster may not negotiate on matters involving bodily injury or represent the parties in court.  Larson v. Lesser, 106 So 2d 188 (Fla. 1958).

17.  JAILHOUSE LAWYERS

 

There are several constitutional cases from the United States Supreme Court that deal with the issue of legal assistance to inmates.  From an unlicensed practice of law standpoint, the Code of Federal regulations and the Florida Administrative Code allow limited nonlawyer assistance in parole and probation matters.  However, a nonlawyer may not give an inmate legal advice, draft pleadings for the inmate or represent the inmate in court.  The Florida Bar v. Mills, 410 So. 2d 498 (Fla. 1982).

18.  LAW CLERKS/STUDENTS

A law student or law graduate may not practice law unless certified by the Supreme Court of Florida as a Certified Legal Intern pursuant to Chapter 11 of the Rules Regulating The Florida Bar.  If so certified, the law student or law graduate may represent certain individuals in limited circumstances.

19.  MECHANICS LIENS

The Supreme Court of Florida has held that a nonlawyer may prepare the notice to owner and notice to contractor required by the mechanics lien statute.  The Fla. Bar re: Advisory Opinion – Nonlawyer Preparation of Notice to Owner and Notice to Contractor, 544 So. 2d 1013 (Fla. 1989).  However, a nonlawyer may not prepare liens or give legal advice regarding the statute.  The Fla. Bar re: Advisory Opinion – Activities of Community Association Managers, 681 So. 2d 1119 (Fla. 1996).

20.  PREPARATION OF LEGAL DOCUMENTS

Generally speaking, a nonlawyer may sell forms and complete the form with information provided in writing by the individual.  The Florida Bar v. Brumbaugh, 355 So. 2d 1186 (Fla. 1978). If the nonlawyer is using a form approved by the Supreme Court of Florida, the nonlawyer may engage in limited oral communication to elicit the factual information that goes in the blanks of the form.  Rule 10-2.1 (a), R.Reg.Fla.Bar.  The nonlawyer may not make any changes to the form and may not give advice on possible courses of action.  If the nonlawyer is using a form which has not been approved by the Supreme Court of Florida, the nonlawyer may only type the blanks on the form with information obtained from the individual in writing.  This general rule has been applied in a variety of circumstances including the following:

     a.  BANKRUPTCY

Nonlawyers may only type bankruptcy forms from information provided by the individual in writing; they cannot offer legal advice or help select the forms.  In re: Calzadilla, 151 B.R. 622 (Bkrtcy. S. D. Fla. 1993).

     b.  CORPORATE

A nonlawyer may not prepare corporate documents for another.  This includes the articles of incorporation, the corporate charter and related documents.  The Florida Bar v. Fuentes, 190 So. 2d 748 (Fla. 1966); The Florida Bar v. Keehley, 190 so. 2d 173 (Fla. 1966).

     c.  DIVORCE

The general rule discussed above applies to the family law area.  The forms contained in the family law rules are considered Supreme Court Approved forms.  The nonlawyer may not make any changes to the form and may not give advice on possible courses of action.  If the nonlawyer is using a form which has not been approved by the Supreme Court of Florida, the nonlawyer may only type the blanks on the form with information obtained from the individual in writing.

     d.  INSURANCE DOCUMENTS AND PENSION PLANS

The Supreme Court of Florida has held that a nonlawyer insurance agent may not prepare legal documents, including pension plans.  The Florida Bar v. Turner, 355 So. 2d 766 (Fla. 1978).  However, in the area of pension plans, the Court has held that certain nonlawyers who are authorized to appear before the IRS are allowed to draft certain pension documents, including the plan itself.  The Fla. Bar re: Advisory Opinion – Nonlawyer Preparation of Pension Plans, 571 So. 2d 430 (Fla. 1990).

     e.  PROBATE

The general rule has been applied to the probate area.  The Supreme Court of Florida has held that it constitutes the unlicensed practice of law for a nonlawyer to draft a living trust and related documents for another. The Fla. Bar re: Advisory Opinion Nonlawyer Preparation of Living Trusts, 613 So. 2d 426 (Fla. 1992).  The Court also held that a nonlawyer cannot draft a will for a third party.  The Florida Bar v. Larkin, 298 So. 2d 371 (Fla. 1974).  However, a nonlawyer corporate creditor may file a statement of claim in a probate matter.  Summit Pool Supplies v. Price, 461 So. 2d 272 (Fla. 5th. DCA 1985).

     f.  REAL PROPERTY (INCLUDING REAL ESTATE LICENSEES & TITLE INSURANCE        COMPANIES)  

In 1950, the Supreme Court of Florida held that a real estate licensee may prepare the contract for sale of real estate but any other documents must be prepared by a member of The Florida Bar.  Keyes Co. v. Dade County Bar Association, 46 So. 2d 605 (Fla.1950).  The drafting of the contract is considered the practice of law, a non-licensee may not draft the contract.  The Court merely carved out an exception for licensees.

The Court later carved out an exception for title insurance companies.  In The Florida Bar v. McPhee, 195 So. 2d 552 (Fla. 1967) the Court held that a title insurance company may conduct the closing and prepare documents incident to the issuance of title insurance only if the company is actually issuing the title insurance.  Again, the activity is the practice of law, it is just authorized in these limited circumstances to these individuals.

As to others, the Court has held that it constitutes the unlicensed practice of law for a nonlawyer to prepare a warranty deed, quitclaim deed, land trusts, leases and mortgage agreements.  The Florida Bar v. Irizarry, 268 So. 2d 377 (Fla. 1972); The Florida Bar v. Hughes, 697 So. 2d 501 (Fla. 1997); The Florida Bar v. Lister, 662 So. 2d 1241 (Fla. 1995); The Florida Bar v. Valdes, 464 So. 2d 1183 (Fla. 1985)(there are 3 Supreme Court Approved leases which nonlawyers may complete with information provided orally by the individual).  However, an authorized agent may bid at a mortgage judicial foreclosure sale.  Heilman v. Suburban Coastal Co., 506 So. 2d 1088 (Fla. 4th DCA 1987).

21.  SEMINARS ON LEGAL RIGHTS

A nonlawyer may conduct a seminar at which general legal information is given, however, the nonlawyer may not give specific legal advice.  The Florida Bar v. Raymond, James and Associates, Inc., 215 So. 2d 613 (Fla. 1968).  Therefore, while the nonlawyer may give general information, the nonlawyer may not answer specific legal questions.

The Soreide Law Group, PLLC,  represents those seeking admittance to the Florida Bar, and existing lawyers, for both investigative hearings and formal hearings in front of the Florida Bar. For more information about our services please visit: www.floridabarhearing.com or call (888) 760-6552

Florida Lawyers Draw Suspicion in Foreclosure Mess

Recently a Palm Beach Post article by Christine Stapleton and Kimberly Miller stated that young Florida lawyers out of law school and looking for work,  found steady paychecks in burgeoning firms whose business is based on repossessing the American dream.

The article states that more than 260 attorneys work at four of Florida’s largest foreclosure firms, and 48 percent of them have been practicing law for less than three years, according to Florida Bar records obtained by The Palm Beach Post.

With this fall’s allegations of forged foreclosure documents, fraudulent notarizations and questionable affidavits submitted in tens of thousands of foreclosure cases, those nascent lawyers are now under a cloud of suspicion.

Some may face Florida Bar investigations that could end their careers, while homeowner advocates wonder whether the foreclosure crisis would have reached its state of disorder if it weren’t for legions of novice lawyers doing the legwork.

And as the state’s overwhelmed court system sorts through the foreclosure chaos, many of the attorneys who worked for the now deposed law firms have been hired at other large companies doing foreclosure work.

The Palm Beach Post stated that the Atlanta-based McCalla Raymer law firm, which handles foreclosures for mortgage giant Fannie Mae in Georgia, hopes to do the same in Florida. In November, as the firm began setting up shop in Orlando with 10 former attorneys of a diposed Florida firm, disgruntled homeowners in Georgia filed a federal class-action lawsuit against the firm, claiming it used forged documents to take their homes, often while they were in the midst of modifying their loans. This month four other Georgia homeowners – who are representing themselves – have filed similar lawsuits against McCalla Raymer.

The firm initially registered to do business in Florida as McCalla Raymer Florida LLC but dissolved that firm a month later and is now registered to do business in Florida as Stone, McGehee & Silver. The firm, which hired former Fannie Mae associate general counsel and foreclosure expert Susan Reid last month, has plans to expand throughout Florida, advertising for attorneys in Tampa, Fort Lauderdale, Miami and Orlando. While at Fannie Mae, Reid worked with foreclosure attorneys in its retained attorney network, including those from an office that was diposed in Florida.

Still, the distribution of former attorneys from a diposed firm to other firms feels like an injustice to some home­owners in foreclosure.

In sworn statements taken by the state attorney general’s office, two former employees of a diposed Florida firm – a paralegal and a legal assistant – attest to wrongdoing at the firm that included hiding problem files from federal auditors, forging signatures and making up documents as staff struggled to keep up with a mounting volume of foreclosures.

Lack of experience could have led young lawyers to follow their employer’s lead, unaware they may be committing an offense, nonetheless lawyers share a large portion of blame in the foreclosure fracas.

The Soreide Law Group, PLLC,  represents those seeking admittance to the Florida Bar, and existing lawyers, for both investigative hearings and formal hearings in front of the Florida Bar. For more information about our services please visit: www.floridabarhearing.com or call (888) 760-6552.

SPEAKING ENGAGEMENT NOVEMBER 11, 2010

Mr. Lars Soreide was invited back to speak at St. Thomas University School of Law’s Distinguished Speaker Series to discuss the growing problem of law applicants getting called in for investigative and formal hearings by the Florida Board of Bar Examiners for financial mismanagement. Topics discussed included: credit card debt, bankruptcy, foreclosure, short sales, student loans and over all financial responsibility. Strategies for formally documenting a record of rehabilitation and how to work with your creditors was also discussed. This was followed by a questions and answer session where applicants could ask questions with their specific concerns. For a more detailed explanation they were directed to contact him through his website www.FloridaBarHearing.com.

BAR APPLICANTS IN FINANCIAL TROUBLE

FINANCES CAN BECOME PROBLEMS FOR BAR APPLICANTS

          With increasing frequency I am representing more and more applicants in Florida Bar Investigative Hearings and Formal Hearings before the Florida Board of Bar Examiners with financial problems. These problems range from home foreclosure to unpaid credit card debt.  Applicants ask all the time,”How do I prepare for this hearing when I haven’t done anything to resolve any of these issues?”  Well, the fact of the matter is there are many things you can do. For instance,  it is up to the Florida Bar Applicant to establish a record of rehabilitation at the Investigative or Formal Hearing. One way that I advise my clients to establish financial rehabilitation, is to take a financial educational course. There are several that I find to be particularly helpful and accepted by the Board as establishing financial rehabilitation.  The classes have you set out a plan, which the Board appreciates, that shows how you are going to get out of debt and stay out of debt. If you are in the financial position to pay off debt and close out accounts, then I strongly suggest you do so and submit a newly amended financial affidavit reflecting your new plan.

            The Florida Board of Bar Examiners’ chief concern is that an Applicant isn’t going to turn their back on their creditors. Even if you pay $20 a month or any nominal amount you can afford toward your debt, it is more beneficial to you at your Bar Hearing because this acknowledges you owe the money and are working toward honoring your debts and not turning your back on your creditors. Why are they so concerned you may ask? Well, the answer to that question is simple, trust accounts. You will manage other people’s money as an attorney. If you can’t manage your own finances, don’t expect the Board to allow you to manage others.

            What if my home is in foreclosure or I am delinquent in my mortgage? The popular philosophy on this matter is completely opposite of that of the Florida Bar. Many people feel that in most instances it is financially irresponsible to continue to pay on a mortgage when the value of the house is underwater. The bank took a risk lending on the property just as you took a risk borrowing the money. It was an honest business transaction, with you on the one hand trying to make an investment in a property, and the bank on the other trying to make interest.  However, the Bar does not adopt this outlook and that is the only outlook you should be concerned with. Again, it goes straight to the core of financial responsibility. If you borrow money, you pay it back. If you can’t work out a new deal, then you at least need to stay in constant communication with your creditors and pay what you can. If you can’t pay anything, short sale the property. Also, put everything in writing, send letters so you have documented evidence at your hearing of this communication and work out plan.

            Do everything in your power to resolve all the financial issues before the hearing. Financial irresponsibility is one of the hardest bar hearings to defend because it is a problem today. If you committed a crime years ago, it is actually easier to defend because you have time on your side and it was an isolated incident, whereas with financial problems, as you sit before the Florida Board of Bar Examiners, that problem is still on going. For more advice on Florida Bar Investigative and Formal Hearings you should speak with a lawyer experienced with these types of issues. For a free consultation as to how to prepare for your Florida Bar Investigative Hearing or Formal hearing call, Lars K. Soreide, Esq., with the Soreide Law Group, PLLC. We represent applicants throughout the state of Florida. Our main office is located in downtown Fort Lauderdale. www.FloridaBarHearing.com (888) 760-6552.

FLORIDA’S SUPREME COURT DISCIPLINES 18 ATTORNEYS 9/30/10

The Florida Bar, Florida’s guardian for the integrity of the legal profession, announces that the Florida Supreme Court in recent court orders disciplined 18 attorneys, disbarring six and suspending eight. Some attorneys received more than one form of discipline. Four attorneys were publicly reprimanded and one was placed on probation. One attorney was also ordered to pay restitution.

As an official agency of the Florida Supreme Court, The Florida Bar and its Department of Lawyer Regulation are charged with administering a statewide disciplinary system to enforce Supreme Court rules of professional conduct for the 88,000-plus lawyers admitted to practice law in Florida. Since Aug. 1, 2007, case files have been posted to attorneys’ individual Florida Bar profiles.

The court orders are not final until time expires to file a rehearing motion and, if filed, determined. The filing of such a motion does not alter the effective date of the discipline. Disbarred lawyers may not re-apply for admission for five years. They are required to go through an extensive process that rejects many who apply. It includes a rigorous background check and retaking the bar exam. Historically, fewer than five percent of disbarred lawyers seek readmission.

This information was obtained from The Florida Bar’s website.

The Soreide Law Group, PLLC,  represents those seeking admittance to the Florida Bar, and existing lawyers, for both investigative hearings and formal hearings in front of the Florida Bar. For more information about our services please visit: www.floridabarhearing.com or call (888) 760-6552.

FLORIDA’S SUPREME COURT DISCIPLINES 21 ATTORNEYS 8/31/10

It was announced on Aug. 31, 2010, on The Florida Bar’s websited that The Florida Bar, the state’s guardian for the integrity of the legal profession, that the Florida Supreme Court in recent court orders disciplined 21 attorneys, disbarring seven and suspending 11. Some attorneys received more than one form of discipline. Three attorneys were publicly reprimanded and one was placed on probation. Two were ordered to pay restitution.

As an official agency of the Florida Supreme Court, The Florida Bar and its Department of Lawyer Regulation are charged with administering a statewide disciplinary system to enforce Supreme Court rules of professional conduct for the 88,000-plus lawyers admitted to practice law in Florida. Since Aug. 1, 2007, case files have been posted to attorneys’ individual Florida Bar profiles.

The court orders are not final until time expires to file a rehearing motion and, if filed, determined. The filing of such a motion does not alter the effective date of the discipline. Disbarred lawyers may not re-apply for admission for five years. They are required to go through an extensive process that rejects many who apply. It includes a rigorous background check and retaking the bar exam. Historically, fewer than five percent of disbarred lawyers seek readmission.

This information was obtained from The Florida Bar’s website.

The Soreide Law Group, PLLC,  represents those seeking admittance to the Florida Bar, and existing lawyers, for both investigative hearings and formal hearings in front of the Florida Bar. For more information about our services please visit: www.floridabarhearing.com or call (888) 760-6552.

FLORIDA SUPREME COURT DISCIPLINES 27 ATTORNEYS

On July 29,2010, The Florida Bar, the state’s guardian for the integrity of the legal profession, announced that the Florida Supreme Court in recent court orders disciplined 27 attorneys, disbarring eight and suspending 17. Some attorneys received more than one form of discipline. Two attorneys were publicly reprimanded and three were placed on probation. Three were ordered to pay restitution.

The Florida Bar, as an official agency of the Florida Supreme Court, and its Department of Lawyer Regulation are charged with administering a statewide disciplinary system to enforce Supreme Court rules of professional conduct for the 88,000-plus lawyers admitted to practice law in Florida. Since Aug. 1, 2007, case files have been posted to attorneys’ individual Florida Bar profiles and may be reviewed at and/or downloaded from The Florida Bar’s website.

The court orders are not final until time expires to file a rehearing motion and, if filed, determined. The filing of such a motion does not alter the effective date of the discipline. Disbarred lawyers may not re-apply for admission for five years. They are required to go through an extensive process that rejects many who apply. It includes a rigorous background check and retaking the bar exam. Historically, fewer than 5 percent of disbarred lawyers seek readmission.

The above information was obtained from The Florida Bar’s website.

Soreide Law Group, PLLC,  represents Florida Bar applicants and attorneys,  before the Florida Board of Bar Examiners and the Florida Bar Grievance Committee. For more information about our services please visit: www.floridabarhearing.com or call (888) 760-6552.

 

FLORIDA SUPREME COURT DISCIPLINES 21 ATTORNEYS

On June 30,2010, The Florida Bar, the state’s guardian for the integrity of the legal profession, announced that the Florida Supreme Court in recent court orders disciplined 21 attorneys, disbarring six and suspending nine. Some attorneys received more than one form of discipline. Seven attorneys were publicly reprimanded and four were placed on probation. Four were ordered to pay restitution.

As an official agency of the Florida Supreme Court, The Florida Bar and its Department of Lawyer Regulation are charged with administering a statewide disciplinary system to enforce Supreme Court rules of professional conduct for the 88,000-plus lawyers admitted to practice law in Florida.

Court orders are not final until time expires to file a rehearing motion and, if filed, determined. The filing of such a motion does not alter the effective date of the discipline. Disbarred lawyers may not re-apply for admission for five years. They are required to go through an extensive process that rejects many who apply. It includes a rigorous background check and retaking the bar exam. Historically, less than 5 percent of disbarred lawyers seek readmission.
This information was obtained from The Florida Bar website.
The following lawyers are disciplined:

Leo Becerra, Jr., 6780 Coral Way, Miami, suspended until further order, following a May 26 court order. (Admitted to practice: 1999) According to a petition for emergency suspension, there was clear, convincing evidence that Becerra misappropriated and/or diverted client funds. (Case No. SC10-947)

Kathleen M. P. Davis, P.O. Box 542796, Greenacres, to be publicly reprimanded and placed on probation for one year following a March 25 court order. (Admitted to practice: 1995) Further, Davis shall pay restitution of $15,000 to three clients. After accepting retainer fees from clients in two separate family law cases, Davis failed to diligently pursue the cases. (Case No. SC09-1979)

Jose Miguel De la O, P.O. Box 347106, Coral Gables, disbarred on consent, effective 30 days from a May 20 court order. (Admitted to practice: 1986) De La O failed to use client funds as instructed by his clients. He also failed to preserve and apply client funds in accordance with Rules Regulating Trust Accounts. (Case No. SC10-848)

Gary Elvin Doane, 738 W. Colonial Drive, Orlando, to be publicly reprimanded and placed on probation for one year, effective immediately, following a May 20 court order. (Admitted to practice: 1977) In advertising his services, Doane used the trade name “Legal Experts,” when he was a sole practitioner who was certified by The Florida Bar in only one area of the law — civil trial. (Case No. SC08-1278)

Michael Sean Foster, 1398 SW 1st St., Miami, suspended for two years, following a May 13 court order. The suspension shall run consecutive to the suspension imposed on Oct. 8, 2009. (Admitted to practice: 2004) Foster accepted representing numerous clients and thereafter failed to communicate with them; failed to act with reasonable diligence and promptness; failed to appear at court hearings; charged an excessive fee; refused to respond to the investigative inquiries of The Florida Bar; and refused to participate in the disciplinary process before the grievance committee. (Case No. SC09-2028)

Gary D Gelch, 1318 SE 2nd Ave., Fort Lauderdale, to be publicly reprimanded following an April 15 court order. (Admitted to practice: 1995) Gelch pleaded guilty to failure to competently represent a client and failure to be truthful in representing her case. (Case No. SC10-581)

Joseph Kevin Hall, 5721 S.W. 17th St., Plantation, to be publicly reprimanded and placed on probation for one year, following a May 6 court order. (Admitted to practice: 1996) After being retained to provide legal services, Hall failed to communicate with the client. (Case No. SC10-579)

Eric D. Hightower, 2815 Cuyahoga Lane, West Palm Beach, suspended for six months, effective immediately, following an April 15 court order. Three months of the suspension shall run concurrent with his current 30-month suspension and three months shall follow his current 30-month suspension. (Admitted to practice: 1988) Hightower is the subject of three separate Florida Bar discipline matters. He was hired to represent clients, but he failed to timely notify clients and the court of his suspension. (Case No. SC09-1661)

Dwayne Bisford Johnson, Sr., 733 Cypress Drive Apt. A, Lake Park, suspended for 91 days, effective thirty days from a May 20 court order. (Admitted to practice: 1998) Johnson shall pay restitution of $500.00 to one client. Because of delinquencies of CLE requirements, basic skills course requirements and Bar fees, Johnson was prohibited from practicing law in Florida from Jan. 31, 2008 through March 13, 2009. Johnson practiced law during that period despite his ineligibility. (Case Nos. SC09-1846 & SC09-1889)

Nicolas Andres Manzini, 169 E. Flagler St., Suite 1500, Miami, disbarred effective 30 days from an April 1 court order. (Admitted to practice: 1978) Manzini is the subject of four separate Florida Bar disciplinary matters. (Case No. SC10-562)

Omar Medina, Jr., 505 S. Magnolia Ave., Tampa, suspended for 90 days, effective June 24, following a May 12 court order. (Admitted to practice: 1989) After the suspension expires, Media will be placed on probation for three years. Further, Medina shall receive a public reprimand. In one instance Media signed an attorney’s name to a settlement document without the other attorney’s knowledge or permission. He also failed to tell opposing counsel that the signature for the other attorney was not genuine. In another case, an audit of Medina’s trust account revealed that Medina failed to maintain required trust account records. (Case Nos. SC09-164 & SC09-644)

Joseph Barry Miller, 235 Porto Vecchio Way, Palm Beach Gardens, suspended effective 30 days from a May 24 court order. (Admitted to practice: 1973) Miller pleaded guilty in U.S. District Court, Southern District of Florida, to one count of conspiracy to commit wire and mail fraud, in relation to moneys obtained as a result of fraudulent mortgages, a felony. (Case No. SC10-942)

Jill Beth Newman, 8615 Indian River Run, Boynton Beach, suspended for two years effective retroactive to May 6, 2009, following an April 23 court order. (Admitted to practice: 2000) Newman falsely represented that she was holding escrow deposits in her trust account, when in fact, she had not received or deposited funds. She deposited operating account funds to cover shortages in her trust account; and an audit of Newman’s trust account revealed that multiple deposit slips had no indication for the client or the matter for which the funds were received. Newman’s bank records subpoenaed by the Bar revealed that Newman wrote two checks totaling $20,000, when her operating account was overdrawn by more than $1,700. (Case No. SC-09-37)

Frank T. Noska, P.O. Box 254, Palm Beach, to be publicly reprimanded following an April 15 court order. (Admitted to practice: 1982) Further, Noska shall pay restitution of more than $15,000 to three clients. After being retained to handle two separate tax cases, Noska entrusted much of the day-to-day handling of the matters to people who were not licensed Florida attorneys. Noska did not properly supervise the non-lawyers to ensure that deadlines were met and files were properly managed. (Case Nos. SC10-158 & SC10-507)

Natalia V. Poliakova, 2837 S.W. 3rd Ave., Miami, suspended for six months, effective 30 days from a May 20 court order. (Admitted to practice: 2000) Further, Poliakova shall pay restitution of $500.00 to one client. Poliakova was retained to assist with the filing of an application for lawful permanent residence status (Green Card) for a family. She failed to inform the clients of the denial of the Green Card application and their right to appeal, and she failed to provide timely responses to inquires from The Florida Bar. Poliakova also knowingly made a false statement of material fact to the grievance committee. (Case No. SC10-160)

Tashi Iana Richards, 7920 N.W. 6th St. Apt. 205, Pembroke Pines, permanently disbarred effective immediately, following a May 6 court order. (Admitted to practice: 2004) After accepting a retainer of $5,000 to handle legal issues involving contractor workmanship, code enforcement and a possible foreclosure, Richards failed to communicate with the client. As a result, the client and her family were harmed by Richards’ failure to act. Richards also failed to respond to a letter sent to her by The Florida Bar regarding the case. (Case No. SC09-2247)

Daniel J. Rose, 323 N.E. 6th Ave., Delray Beach, to be publicly reprimanded following an April 15 court order. (Admitted to practice: 2001) Rose is the subject of two Florida Bar disciplinary matters. In one instance, a couple authorized their daughter to sign their names on a mortgage note. Rose notarized the signatures, knowing they had not actually signed the document. In another instance, an examination of Rose’s trust account records revealed that he had commingled funds. (Case No. SC10-584)

Vincent Tony Sammarco, P.O. Box 841026, Pembroke Pines, disbarred effective immediately, following an April 15 court order. (Admitted to practice: 1983) As an agent for the Attorney’s Title Insurance Fund, Sammarco failed to preserve and issue the Fund’s title insurance forms or conduct real estate closings in a prudent manner. He also failed to properly preserve and disburse funds he held in trust that were to be used to pay off mortgages after real estate closings. (Case No. SC10-635)

Raul Javier Sanchez de Varona, 1320 S. Dixie Highway, Suite 280, Coral Gables, disbarred effective 30 days from an April 15 court order. (Admitted to practice: 1990) Subsequent to a disciplinary resignation in 2004, Sanchez de Varona held himself out as an attorney. He admitted that in November 2009, he signed and transmitted an e-mail designating himself as the “general counsel” for a corporation in which he held an ownership interest. (Case No. SC10-593)

James L. Soule, 7515 W. Oakland Park Blvd. #100, Fort Lauderdale, suspended for 91 days following a June 3 court order. (Admitted to practice: 1994) Soule is currently suspended, therefore the suspension is effective immediately. In one instance, Soule was retained to handle several civil matters. While representing the client, Soule began handling a financial investment as well. When asked to return the investment funds of $135,000, Soule failed to do so. In another instance, Soule failed to pay the $4,000 balance due in a final judgment. (Case No. SC09-1845)

Cynthia Gaskins Strickland, 2450 Hollywood Blvd., Suite 303B, Hollywood, permanently disbarred effective immediately, following an April 29 court order. (Admitted to practice: 2000) A preliminary examination of Strickland’s trust account records by The Florida Bar revealed evidence of misappropriation of client funds as well as a pattern of using recent deposits to cover obligations incurred previously. (Case No. SC09-2009)

Soreide Law Group represents those seeking admittance to the Florida Bar, and existing lawyers, for both investigative hearings and formal hearings in front of the Florida Bar. For more information about our services please visit: www.floridabarhearing.com or call (888) 760-6552.