From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Florida Bar v. Lund

Supreme Court of Florida
Feb 25, 1982
410 So. 2d 922 (Fla. 1982)

Summary

imposing ten-day suspension when attorney admitted small portion of testimony before grievance committee was untrue despite contentions that it was unintentional

Summary of this case from Florida Bar v. Glick

Opinion

No. 60432.

February 25, 1982.

John F. Harkness, Jr., Executive Director and Stanley A. Spring, Staff Counsel, Tallahassee, Cynthia S. Prettyman, Bar Counsel, Fort Lauderdale, and William T. Haverfield, Chairman, Twentieth Judicial Circuit Grievance Committee "A", Fort Myers, of The Florida Bar, for complainant.

John Larson Lund, in pro. per.


In this disciplinary proceeding the referee has recommended that the respondent, a member of the Florida Bar, be found guilty of violation of the Florida Bar Code of Professional Responsibility Disciplinary Rules 1-102(A)(1), 1-102(A)(4), 1-102(A)(5), and 1-102(A)(6).

DR 1-102 Misconduct
(A) A lawyer shall not:
(1) Violate a Disciplinary Rule.
* * * * * *
(4) Engage in conduct involving dishonesty, fraud, deceit, or misrepresentation.
(5) Engage in conduct that is prejudicial to the administration of justice.
(6) Engage in any other conduct that adversely reflects on his fitness to practice law.

The complaint arises from testimony that the respondent had given before a grievance committee hearing. The respondent admits that a small portion of his testimony turned out to be untrue, but that he was unaware of its untruthfulness and that there was no intentional misrepresentation. He urges this Court that the referee's findings of fact do not support a conclusion of a violation of any disciplinary rule.

We reject that contention and approve the referee's report. We also adopt the referee's recommendation of discipline and suspend John Larson Lund for a period of ten days. The suspension shall be effective March 29, 1982, thereby giving respondent time to close out his practice and take the necessary steps to protect his clients, and it is ordered that respondent shall not accept any new business. He is further directed to pay costs in the sum of $684.20 to the Florida Bar.

It is so ordered.

SUNDBERG, C.J., and ADKINS, OVERTON and McDONALD, JJ., concur.

BOYD, J., dissents.


Summaries of

Florida Bar v. Lund

Supreme Court of Florida
Feb 25, 1982
410 So. 2d 922 (Fla. 1982)

imposing ten-day suspension when attorney admitted small portion of testimony before grievance committee was untrue despite contentions that it was unintentional

Summary of this case from Florida Bar v. Glick
Case details for

Florida Bar v. Lund

Case Details

Full title:THE FLORIDA BAR, COMPLAINANT, v. JOHN LARSON LUND, RESPONDENT

Court:Supreme Court of Florida

Date published: Feb 25, 1982

Citations

410 So. 2d 922 (Fla. 1982)

Citing Cases

The Florida Bar v. Tobkin

he conduct in those cases was significantly less egregious. See Fla. Bar v. Glick, 693 So.2d 550, 551 (Fla.…

Florida Bar v. Glick

We find this sanction appropriate especially in light of Glick's misrepresentation to the Bar. See Florida…