Sticky Fingers: Attorney Thefts from Clients Spiked in Great Recession
The last recession saw a significant increase in Florida disbarments for stealing and other serious trust account violations.
March 09, 2018 at 11:54 AM
10 minute read
The Great Recession left a wake of disbarred attorneys in Florida who lost their licenses after dipping into client trust funds in order to keep their practices afloat.
Florida Bar data reviewed by the Daily Business Review showed client theft-related disbarments after the recession increased by nearly 88 percent, peaking at 47 disbarments in 2010. It often takes a year or more for the state Supreme Court to issue a final disciplinary order once the Florida Bar is notified of a possible trust account violation. That means disbarments for recession-era conduct came slightly after the economic downturn.
The recession lasted from December 2007 through June 2009, according to the nonprofit National Bureau of Economic Research. Many attorneys lost business during the recession as companies and families struggled to balance their checkbooks.
“This was the height of the financial crisis in Florida, and it gave rise to discipline cases for trust account violations as well as issues involving consumer fraud,” the bar said in a statement.
Given that there are more than 106,000 attorneys in Florida, the number of those who stole from clients during the recession is minuscule. But following the bar's client trust account rules is sacrosanct—and any violations cut to the heart of the profession, said Florida Bar Board of Governors member Dennis Kainen.
“If members of the public can't rely on their lawyers, then the profession will ultimately cease to exist as we know it,” said Kainen, a partner at Weisberg Kainen Mark in Miami.
Bar Discipline
Infogram
What Causes Lawyers to Steal?
When money gets tight, some lawyers think they can dip into their client trust accounts—just for $10,000 or so, until they can pay their bills.
“They'll move money over, thinking in a couple days they're going to replenish it,” said Miami attorney Andrew Berman, who represents lawyers facing bar complaints. “Often, they don't.”
After the first theft, “the seal is broken,” the Young, Berman, Karpf & Gonzalez senior partner said. Subsequent ”borrowing” gets easier and easier, until the attorney is too far behind to make up the difference.
Jack Weiss, a bar discipline defense lawyer in Tallahassee, also said the few cases he's seen in the past decade involving severe trust account violations have been “a direct result of [lawyers] using their trust account as an interest-free loan account.”
“That's grossly improper,” said Weiss, of counsel at Rumberger Kirk & Caldwell. “You just don't do that.”
Other times, attorneys who steal aren't squeezed for cash at all—they just think they can get away with it, defense lawyers said.
Particularly for real estate and personal injury attorneys, who often have six- or seven-figure trust account balances, it can be a while before a bounced check or a client complaint tips off the bar to a possible problem. Banks report insufficient funds in client trust accounts directly to the Florida Bar.
For instance, Fort Myers attorney Joseph Troiano agreed to disbarment in February 2010, shortly after SunTrust Bank sent five notices of insufficient funds in the firm's trust account in one week. One client who had $450,000 held in trust could not clear a $10,000, according to the bar.
It turned out the real estate and tax attorney took about $2.5 million from the trust account, according to his plea agreement in criminal court. Troiano was investing client funds in a Costa Rican real estate project, a scheme that began in 2008, according to the indictment.
Stealing from trust accounts is also more common among solo practitioners and small firms, particularly given a 2014 bar rule amendment making each lawyer in a firm responsible for reporting knowledge accounting issues.
“I can't say I've ever seen a firm where two people got their hands in the cookie jar,” said Kevin Tynan, a Tamarac attorney with Richardson & Tynan, who began defending lawyers in 2000 after 13 years as Florida Bar counsel.
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
NOT FOR REPRINT
© 2024 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.
You Might Like
View AllShaq Signs $11 Million Settlement to Resolve Astrals Investor Claims
5 minute readBenworth Accused of Predatory Tactics in Foreclosure Dispute as Elderly Defendant's Health Deteriorates
4 minute readTrending Stories
- 1Corporate Counsel's 2024 Award Winners Performed Legal Wizardry, Gave a Hand Up to Others
- 2Goodwin, Polsinelli, Fox Rothschild Find New Phila. Offices
- 3Helping Lawyers Move Away from ‘Grinding’ and Toward a ‘Flow’
- 4How GC-of-Year Sam Khichi Has Helped CVS Barrel Through Challenges
- 5A Website is Not a ‘Place.’ What Took So Long To Get This Right?
Who Got The Work
Michael G. Bongiorno, Andrew Scott Dulberg and Elizabeth E. Driscoll from Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale and Dorr have stepped in to represent Symbotic Inc., an A.I.-enabled technology platform that focuses on increasing supply chain efficiency, and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The case, filed Oct. 2 in Massachusetts District Court by the Brown Law Firm on behalf of Stephen Austen, accuses certain officers and directors of misleading investors in regard to Symbotic's potential for margin growth by failing to disclose that the company was not equipped to timely deploy its systems or manage expenses through project delays. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Nathaniel M. Gorton, is 1:24-cv-12522, Austen v. Cohen et al.
Who Got The Work
Edmund Polubinski and Marie Killmond of Davis Polk & Wardwell have entered appearances for data platform software development company MongoDB and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The action, filed Oct. 7 in New York Southern District Court by the Brown Law Firm, accuses the company's directors and/or officers of falsely expressing confidence in the company’s restructuring of its sales incentive plan and downplaying the severity of decreases in its upfront commitments. The case is 1:24-cv-07594, Roy v. Ittycheria et al.
Who Got The Work
Amy O. Bruchs and Kurt F. Ellison of Michael Best & Friedrich have entered appearances for Epic Systems Corp. in a pending employment discrimination lawsuit. The suit was filed Sept. 7 in Wisconsin Western District Court by Levine Eisberner LLC and Siri & Glimstad on behalf of a project manager who claims that he was wrongfully terminated after applying for a religious exemption to the defendant's COVID-19 vaccine mandate. The case, assigned to U.S. Magistrate Judge Anita Marie Boor, is 3:24-cv-00630, Secker, Nathan v. Epic Systems Corporation.
Who Got The Work
David X. Sullivan, Thomas J. Finn and Gregory A. Hall from McCarter & English have entered appearances for Sunrun Installation Services in a pending civil rights lawsuit. The complaint was filed Sept. 4 in Connecticut District Court by attorney Robert M. Berke on behalf of former employee George Edward Steins, who was arrested and charged with employing an unregistered home improvement salesperson. The complaint alleges that had Sunrun informed the Connecticut Department of Consumer Protection that the plaintiff's employment had ended in 2017 and that he no longer held Sunrun's home improvement contractor license, he would not have been hit with charges, which were dismissed in May 2024. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Jeffrey A. Meyer, is 3:24-cv-01423, Steins v. Sunrun, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Greenberg Traurig shareholder Joshua L. Raskin has entered an appearance for boohoo.com UK Ltd. in a pending patent infringement lawsuit. The suit, filed Sept. 3 in Texas Eastern District Court by Rozier Hardt McDonough on behalf of Alto Dynamics, asserts five patents related to an online shopping platform. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Rodney Gilstrap, is 2:24-cv-00719, Alto Dynamics, LLC v. boohoo.com UK Limited.
Featured Firms
Law Offices of Gary Martin Hays & Associates, P.C.
(470) 294-1674
Law Offices of Mark E. Salomone
(857) 444-6468
Smith & Hassler
(713) 739-1250