Summary
Attorney reinstatement; burden of proof for rehabilitation; review of referee's report. The Florida Supreme Court denied an attorney's petition for reinstatement after a 91-day suspension for fraudulent conduct, upholding the referee's finding that the attorney failed to prove rehabilitation. The attorney engaged in unauthorized practice during suspension (attending a deposition, failing to remove his name from the office, and not notifying clients) and showed no genuine remorse. The court held that the referee's report was supported by evidence, and the attorney did not meet his burden to show entitlement to resume practice.
Topics
Practice areas
Questions Presented
- Whether the referee's report recommending denial of reinstatement is supported by the evidence.
Holdings
- The referee's report recommending denial of reinstatement is supported by the evidence, and Cohen's petition for reinstatement is denied.
Key quotations
“The burden is on Cohen to establish that he is entitled to resume the privilege of practicing law without restrictions.”
“To support reversal of the referee’s report, Cohen must show that the report is unsupported by the evidence.”
Factual background
Cohen was suspended for ninety-one days for fraudulent conduct. During suspension, he attended a deposition and negotiated settlement, failed to remove his name from office building, failed to notify clients of suspension, and showed no remorse.
Procedural history
Cohen received a ninety-one-day suspension for fraudulent conduct. He filed a petition for reinstatement, and a hearing was held. The referee found rehabilitation not shown and recommended denial. Cohen seeks review.