THE FLORIDA BAR, COMPLAINANT,
v.
WILLIAM J. NEALE, RESPONDENT
AI-generated. These summaries, headnotes, and key points are machine-generated and may contain errors or omissions. Always verify against the full opinion text below. Not legal advice.
The Florida Supreme Court upheld a referee's recommendation to suspend attorney William J. Neale from practice for 60 days and place him on three-year probation for violating Disciplinary Rule 6-101(A)(3) by neglecting client matters and failing to communicate. The violation involved indifference and conscious disregard for duties owed to clients.
The court found that Neale breached Disciplinary Rule 6-101(A)(3) and suspended him from practice for 60 days followed by three years probation with monthly case status reporting requirements and payment of costs.
[1] An attorney accepting a retainer must take appropriate and reasonable action to further his client's best interests, to do so promptly and to keep his client advised at a…
[2] An attorney's indifference and conscious disregard for the responsibility owed to a client constitutes a breach of duty.
Previewing 2 of 6 headnotes on this case. FLexlaw’s editorially structured points of law — every proposition, pinpointed — are reserved for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence“An attorney accepting a retainer must take appropriate and reasonable action to further his client's best interests, to do so promptly and to keep his client advised at all times.”
Establishes the fundamental duty of attorneys to clients regarding prompt action and communication
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceNeale, a 60-year-old attorney with 33 years in practice, accepted a retainer but failed to take prompt and appropriate action to further the client's …
The full statement of facts, procedural history, and disposition for this case are member content.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence© FLexlaw, Inc. — AI-generated enrichments are proprietary. All rights reserved.
Explore caselaw by topic → Browse Attorney'S Duty To Client cases and more on FLexlaw
[*51] PER CURIAM.
In this disciplinary action the referee has recommended that the respondent, William J. Neale, be found guilty of violating Disciplinary Rule 6-101(A)(3) of The Florida Bar Code of Professional Responsibility. Neither The Florida Bar nor Neale sought review of his finding or disciplinary recommendation.
In support of his conclusions, the referee found, among other things:
An attorney accepting a retainer must take appropriate and reasonable action to further his client’s best interests, to do so promptly and to keep his client advised at all times. Respondent’s actions involve indifference and a conscious disregard for the responsibility owed to the client.
The referee properly stated an attorney’s duty; the record supports his conclusion of a breach of that duty.
After referring to prior disciplinary actions against Neale,1 the referee, in recommending discipline, stated:
There is no evidence of a corruptive motive. Respondent is 60 years of age, has been a member of The Florida Bar 33 years, his health is not good. Respondent’s problem has heen neglect and failure to communicate.
I have taken into consideration all facts, including prior disciplinary matters, and recommend 60 days suspension, three years probation, to include conducting a report of status of all his cases on a monthly basis.
We adopt the referee’s recommendation for discipline. We accordingly find that William J. Neale is found to have breached Disciplinary Rule 6-101(A)(3) of the Code of Professional Responsibility. He is hereby suspended from the practice of law for sixty days, and thereafter shall be on probation for three years under the supervision of The Florida Bar. The suspension shall be effective June 20, 1983, 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. A condition of probation shall be a monthly report of the status of all of his cases. In addition, he shall pay the costs of this proceeding in the amount of $1,090.71 within thirty days of the filing of this opinion.
It is so ordered.
ADKINS, Acting C.J., and BOYD, MCDONALD, EHRLICH and SHAW, JJ., concur. . The Fla. Bar v. Neale, 336 So. 2d 356 (Fla. 1976); The Fla. Bar v. Neale, 246 So. 2d 104 (Fla.1971).
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Authorities Cited
- THE Florida BAR v. Neale, 246 So. 2d 104 (Fla. 1971)
- THE Fla. BAR. In re William J. Neale, 336 So. 2d 356 (Fla. 1976)