THE FLORIDA BAR, COMPLAINANT,
v.
MARTIN N. STRELSER, 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 Bar disciplined attorney Martin N. Strelser for multiple violations of professional conduct rules, resulting in disbarment from practice for ten years with conditions requiring restitution to victims and payment of costs.
Strelser was found guilty of violating Disciplinary Rules 1-102(A)(1), (3), (4), (5) and (6); 7-101(A)(3); 7-102(A)(8); 9-102; and 9-102(B)(1) and (4). The Court approved the referee's recommendation and disbarred Strelser from the practice of law in Florida for ten years, conditioned on restitution to all identified victims and payment of costs.
[1] A referee's findings and recommendations in a disciplinary proceeding are subject to review by the Florida Supreme Court.
[2] Failure to file a petition for review of a referee's report in a disciplinary proceeding may result in the court approving the referee's findings and recommendations.
Previewing 2 of 5 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“Having carefully reviewed the record, we approve the findings and recommendations of the referee.”
Establishes the Court's approval of the referee's factual findings and disciplinary recommendations
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceStrelser, a member of The Florida Bar, violated multiple disciplinary rules as detailed in complaints filed by The Florida Bar. The referee found the …
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 Violation Of Code Of Professional Responsibility cases and more on FLexlaw
PER CURIAM.
This disciplinary proceeding by The Florida Bar against Martin N. Strelser, a member of The Florida Bar, is presently before us on complaint of The Florida Bar and Report of Referee. Pursuant to article XI, Rule 11.06(9)(b) of the Integration Rule of The Florida Bar, the referee’s report and record were duly filed with this Court. No petition for review pursuant to article XI, Rule 11.09(1) of the Integration Rule of The Florida Bar has been filed.
Having considered the pleadings and evidence, the referee found the facts are as set forth in the Complaints filed by The Florida Bar. The referee recommends that respondent be found guilty of violation of Disciplinary Rules 1-102(A)(1), (3), (4), (5) and (6); 7-101(A)(3); 7-102(A)(8); 9-102; and 9-102(B)(1) and (4) of the Code of Professional Responsibility and recommends that respondent be disbarred from the practice of law for a period of no less than ten (10) years, commencing from the date of this Court’s Order or commencing from an earlier date, selected by the Court, in consideration of respondent’s seven year absence from the practice of law. The referee further recommends that respondent shall not be reinstated as a member of The Florida Bar until respondent shows proof of restitution to all victims identified in The Florida Bar’s Complaints, as well as payment of the costs in these proceedings.
Having carefully reviewed the record, we approve the findings and recommendations of the referee.
Accordingly, respondent, Martin N. Strel-ser, is hereby disbarred from the practice of law in the State of Florida without leave to reapply for ten years commencing this date with the above conditions effective immediately.
Judgment for costs in the amount of $4,447.10 is hereby entered against respondent, for which sum let execution issue. Interest at the statutory rate shall accrue on all costs not paid within thirty (30) days of entry of this Court’s final order of discipline, unless the time for payment is extended by the Board of Governors.
It is so ordered.
ADKINS, Acting Chief Justice, and OVERTON, MCDONALD, EHRLICH and SHAW, JJ., concur.