5 South Florida Lawyers Disciplined by State Supreme Court
The Florida Supreme Court disciplined 11 attorneys, including five from South Florida, over ethics violations between April 16 and May 21.
May 28, 2020 at 04:58 PM
4 minute read
The COVID-19 pandemic didn't stop the Florida Supreme Court from clamping down on 11 attorneys over ethics violations between April 16 and May 21 — five of whom were from South Florida, according to information released Thursday.
Miami appellate attorney Rafael Angel Castro was disbarred over allegations he neglected two clients' cases for years, repeatedly seeking extensions with late filings and allegedly failing to refund fees.
Florida Justices declined to implement a recommended 18-month suspension and ordered Castro to pay $21,000 in restitution to the clients and $4,300 in costs to the bar. Castro disputed the accuracy of the referee's findings but filed his response late. He was admitted to the bar in 1995 and his disbarment will take effect 30 days from the May 21 court order.
Castro said he felt he was denied due process in a "railroading process" that has made him "no longer proud to be a Florida lawyer." He urged readers to look at his filings, claiming the bar initially offered him a 12-months suspension if he pleaded guilty.
"I denied the Florida Bar's offer and, now, ludicrously, I am being disbarred (i) in respect of the Gordon case, for having untimely filed a petition for writ of habeas corpus – one of my best legal writings — arguing that the law ought to be changed to allow the Florida Supreme Court to use mandamus as a means of supervising the Florida courts of appeals, since certiorari does not exist; and (ii) in the Tilley case, for having untimely filed briefs that were accepted by the Second Court of Appeal, a court which issued a per curiam affirmed opinion after holding oral argument. This usually does not happen," Castro said. "I was blamed also in Tilley for having a headache prior to oral argument and admitting to it, since I drove all night to get to Tampa for that proceeding."
The Florida Supreme also disregarded recommendations that West Palm Beach lawyer Rita Horwitz Altman receive a public reprimand and five years probation, opting instead to suspend her for three years. The Florida Bar accused Horwitz of failing to respond to its inquiries about a grievance filed against her, and of lying to bar investigators and the Supreme Court.
At a hearing before the referee, Horwitz claimed she had been out of town for her son's heart surgery but had returned in time to receive the letter, which she put on her "list of things to get done," according to the state Supreme Court's ruling. Altman was admitted to the bar in 1992 and this is her fourth discipline case, according to the bar.
Miami immigration attorney Troy Donahue Harris has been suspended for 60 days over claims his neglect caused a client's immigration petition to be abandoned and that he filed petitions for which he knew his client was ineligible. The client was ultimately removed in absentia from the U.S., according to the bar. Donahue was admitted to practice in 1997.
Coral Gables attorney Jon B. Lindeman Jr. agreed to a disciplinary revocation that will allow him to reapply to the bar in five years, following multiple bar complaints against him alleging lack of diligence, communication, excessive fees and failure to supervise nonlawyers. Lindeman, admitted to the bar in 1999, also reportedly failed to respond to several bar inquires and subpoenas.
In his petition, Lindeman agreed to an audit of his trust account to reimburse the bar's costs and fees relating to his misconduct.
Hollywood lawyer Janet Peralta Lucente received a 30-day suspension after she was held in contempt from a court order for allegedly failing to let clients, lawyers and tribunals know about her suspension. The high court originally suspended Lucente in November 2019 for failing to respond to a bar inquiry. The attorney was admitted to practice in 1997.
Read more:
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 All'Disease-Causing Bacteria': Colgate and Tom’s of Maine Face Toothpaste Class Action
3 minute readFlorida-Based Law Firms Start to Lag, As New York Takes a Bigger Piece of Deals
3 minute readFowler White Burnett Opens Jacksonville Office Focused on Transportation Practice
3 minute readDisbarred Attorney Alleges ADA Violations in Lawsuit Against Miami-Dade Judges
3 minute readTrending Stories
- 1Gibson Dunn Sued By Crypto Client After Lateral Hire Causes Conflict of Interest
- 2Trump's Solicitor General Expected to 'Flip' Prelogar's Positions at Supreme Court
- 3Pharmacy Lawyers See Promise in NY Regulator's Curbs on PBM Industry
- 4Outgoing USPTO Director Kathi Vidal: ‘We All Want the Country to Be in a Better Place’
- 5Supreme Court Will Review Constitutionality Of FCC's Universal Service Fund
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