The Florida Bar v. Tipler

Summary

The Supreme Court of Florida consolidated three attorney-discipline proceedings involving James Harvey Tipler and disbarred him. The court upheld findings based on misconduct including sexual exploitation of a client, evidence tampering, failures to protect and account for client funds, conversion, fraud, and violations of due process and disciplinary-notice requirements. The court also approved the use of foreign disciplinary judgments and default procedures in the proceedings.

Holdings

1. Under Rule Regulating the Florida Bar 3-4.6(a), a final adjudication by an authorized disciplinary agency of another jurisdiction that an attorney committed misconduct justifying discipline is conclusive proof of that misconduct in a Florida disciplinary proceeding, subject to a limited exception when the foreign proceeding was so deficient that accepting the judgment would be unjust.
2. Due process in a Florida Bar disciplinary proceeding is satisfied when the attorney receives notice of the charges and an opportunity at the disciplinary hearing to be heard and defend against them.
3. A properly served attorney's failure to answer may support a default judgment in a Bar disciplinary proceeding, and the default admits the complaint's allegations as competent, substantial evidence for the referee's findings, even when disbarment is a possible sanction.
4. Disbarment is the appropriate sanction for Tipler's cumulative, egregious misconduct, including sexual exploitation of a client, fabrication and alteration of evidence, dishonesty, misuse of client funds, neglect of clients, trust-account violations, and fraud on a federal bankruptcy court.

Questions Presented

1. Whether final Alabama disciplinary adjudications constituted conclusive proof of Tipler's misconduct in the Florida disciplinary proceedings.
2. Whether Tipler received constitutionally adequate notice and an opportunity to be heard in the disciplinary proceedings, including the proceeding resolved by default.
3. Whether the referee properly entered summary judgment or default judgment on the charged misconduct.
4. Whether disbarment was the appropriate sanction for Tipler's cumulative misconduct across the three proceedings.

Disposition

other