April 15, 2003 Disciplinary Actions

first_img Disciplinary Actions April 15, 2003 Disciplinary Actions April 15, 2003 Disciplinary Actionscenter_img The Florida Supreme Court in recent court orders suspended 11 attorneys, accepted the disciplinary resignation of three, and disbarred two.The following lawyers are disciplined: William Reid Clifton, 41 Derby St., Cocoa, suspended from practicing law in Florida for ten days, effective December 21 2002, following an August 22 court order. ( Admitted to practice : 1971) Clifton failed to respond in a timely manner to official Bar inquiries into his conduct. (Case no. SC01-1692) Adrienne Fechter, 8725 Roswell Road, Atlanta, Ga., suspended from practicing law in Florida for ten days and thereafter until she submits a written response to The Florida Bar regarding allegations referred to in a Bar complaint, effective 30 days following a February 6 court order. ( Admitted to practice : 1986) Fechter failed to respond in writing to an official inquiry by the Bar into her conduct. (Case no. SC02-1576) William Marshall Fogarty, 1489 W. Palmetto Park Road, Ste. 455, Boca Raton, disbarred from practicing law in Florida, effective 30 days following a February 13 court order. ( Admitted to practice : 1986) An audit of Fogarty’s trust account revealed ongoing shortages. Fogarty failed to hold client and third party funds in trust and commingled deposits of his personal funds into the trust account. He also failed maintain minimum trust account records. (Case no. SC02-2009) David Forestier, Jr., 12865 W. Dixie Highway, North Miami, suspended from practicing law in Florida for 30 days, effective 60 days following a February 13 court order. ( Admitted to practice : 1987) Forestier failed to provide competent representation to a client, to act with reasonable diligence and promptness in representing a client, to keep a client reasonably informed about the status of a matter and comply with reasonable requests for information, and to make reasonable efforts to expedite litigation consistent with the interests of the client. He also failed to respond to an official inquiry by the Bar. (Case no. SC02-2127) Austin Brian Gran, 43 Riverside Ave., Medford, Mass., disbarred from practicing law in Florida, effective immediately following a February 6 court order. ( Admitted to practice : 1985) Gran violated rules regulating The Florida Bar in several unrelated matters. He failed to act with reasonable diligence and promptness in representing clients, to keep clients reasonably informed about the status of a matter and comply with reasonable requests for information, and to respond to official inquiries by the Bar. (Case no. SC01-1612) Arlene Lloyd Han, 1628 S.E. 13th Terrace, Cape Coral, suspended from practicing law in Florida, effective 30 days from February 7, following a February 12 court order. ( Admitted to practice : 1988) On January 16, 2001, Han was charged with possession of cocaine, a third degree felony, and possession of paraphernalia, a first degree felony. She subsequently pleaded guilty to both charges. (Case no. SC03-136) Roscoe E. Long, P.O. Box 1133, Dunedin, resigned in lieu of disciplinary proceedings, without leave to seek readmission, following a January 23 court order. Long was previously granted a disciplinary resignation with leave to seek readmission after five years. ( Admitted to practice : 1992) Long violated his previous disciplinary resignation by continuing to have direct contact with a client. continuing to hold himself out as a licensed attorney to the client, Long engaged in the unauthorized practice of law. (Case no. SC02-1870) Byron Howard Perkins, 305 S. Parramore Ave., Orlando, suspended from practicing law in Florida for six months to run concurrent with a six-month suspension entered in another case, following a February 6 court order. ( Admitted to practice : 1991) Perkins failed to act with reasonable diligence and promptness in representing a client, to keep a client informed about the status of a matter and promptly comply with reasonable requests for information, and to respond to an official inquiry by the Bar into his conduct. He also collected an illegal, prohibited, or clearly excessive fee. (Case no. SC02-1686) Martin E. Powers, 2562 S.W. 8th St., Ste. A, Miami, resigned in lieu of disciplinary proceedings, with leave to seek readmission after five years, effective immediately following an October 24 court order. ( Admitted to practice : 1982) Powers allegedly violated Bar rules regulating trust accounts. (Case no. SC02-2151) Roger Rodriguez, 2800 Biscayne Blvd., Ste. 303, Miami, suspended from practicing law in Florida until he has produced requested trust account records, effective 30 days following a February 5 court order. ( Admitted to practice : 1990) Rodriguez failed to comply with a properly issued subpoena for trust account records, dated August 28, 2002, and failed to show good cause for his failure to comply. (Case no. SC02-2444) Stephen Christopher Schroeder, 10230 Ridge Road, New Port Richey, suspended from practicing law in Florida for 30 days, effective retroactive to December 9, 2002, following a February 13 court order. ( Admitted to practice : 1989) Schroeder failed to follow minimum trust accounting procedures and to maintain minimum trust accounting records. He also failed to comply with a subpoena for trust accounting records and to promptly deliver trust funds. (Case no. SC02-1146) John Thomas Shandorf, 152 E. 84th St., New York, N.Y., resigned in lieu of disciplinary proceedings, with leave to seek readmission after five years, effective immediately following a December 12 court order. ( Admitted to practice : 1993) Shandorf was found guilty of two felonies, conspiracy to receive bribes in return for being influenced in the performance of official duties and accepting bribes in return for being influenced in the performance of official duties. (Case no. SC02-1123) John Joseph Robert Skrandel, 9112 Alternate A1A, Ste. 101, North Palm Beach, suspended from practicing law in Florida for three years, effective immediately following a January 9 court order. ( Admitted to practice : 1997) Skrandel was convicted of aggravated assault with a firearm in November 2000. The conduct which was the subject of the criminal action occurred at a little league batting practice in the presence of young children. (Case no. SC02-1546) Saul Smolar, 1440 Coral Ridge Drive, Coral Springs, suspended from practicing law in Florida for three years, effective 30 days following a January 9 court order. ( Admitted to practice : 1982) Smolar violated rules regulating The Florida Bar in several unrelated matters. Among his violations, Smolar allowed his paralegal to have excessive control of cases and to take actions inconsistent with his nonlawyer status. (Case no. SC01-1321) Bartley Kenneth Vickers, 214 N. Washington St., Jacksonville, suspended from practicing law in Florida for 91 days, effective 30 days following a January 9 court order. ( Admitted to practice : 1970) Vickers failed to act with reasonable diligence and promptness in representing a client, to keep a client reasonably informed about the status of a matter, and to respond in writing to an official inquiry by the Bar into his conduct. He also collected an illegal, prohibited or clearly excessive fee. (Case no. SC02-1939) Charles Louis Weissing, P.O. Box 13903, Tampa, suspended from practicing law in Florida for six months, effective 30 days following a February 13 court order. ( Admitted to practice : 1983) Weissing failed to provide competent representation to a client, to act with reasonable diligence and promptness in representing a client, and to keep a client reasonably informed about the status of a matter and promptly comply with reasonable requests for information. He also failed to respond to an official inquiry by the Bar into his conduct. (Case no. SC02-1691) Court orders are not final until time expires to file a rehearing motion and, if filed, determined. The filing of such a motion does not alter the effective date of the discipline.last_img read more

Cricket News I just hope BCCI does not announce their decision on the 90th day: Sreesanth

first_img“I am not bothered by my fitness as I am inspired by Leander Paes and Ashish Nehra, they both kept on playing even after reaching the age of 36. I just hope BCCI does not announce their decision on the 90th day, I hope they do it in a couple of weeks time,” Sreesanth said.The ball is in the BCCI’s court now and they have to decide on the fresh punishment they want to impose and leave any door open for Sreesanth to make a comeback to competitive cricket or even the Indian team. The apex court also said that its verdict will have no effect on the criminal proceedings pending against the former cricketer in the Delhi High Court, where the Delhi Police has challenged a trial court’s order discharging all accused, including Sreesanth, in the IPL spot-fixing case.The bench passed this order on Sreesanth’s plea challenging the decision of a division bench of the Kerala High Court which had restored the life ban imposed on him by the BCCI. New Delhi: Sreesanth, who tried for five long years to get the life-ban lifted has finally got a bit relief from the turmoil he has been through in the last six years as the Supreme Court revoked the life ban imposed on him from cricket on Friday. The apex court gave the Board of Control for Cricket in India (BCCI) three months (90 days) stint to decide afresh on the point of the quantum of punishment for the spearhead. When the news hit Sreesanth’s ears’ he was not only relieved but is hopeful to be back on the cricket field soon. “I need cricket back, I do not think it will take BCCI 90 days to make the decision but I am grateful that the life ban has been removed. I fought my battle all by myself. My practice is going on and the road ahead totally depends on the selectors,” Sreesanth told reporters after the verdict.”It was a huge fight and the Supreme Court has given me a lifeline. There were so many opportunities where I was even going to announce my retirement, but thank god I didn’t. I have started staying fit to play the game, thanks to the T20 and T10 leagues, I can still earn my bread and butter somewhere,” he said. Sreesanth’s life-time ban lifted by the apex board of India. The BCCI has been give 90 days to come up with their final decision. Sreesanth is hopeful to make a comeback into the Indian team.  For all the Latest Sports News News, Cricket News News, Download News Nation Android and iOS Mobile Apps. highlightslast_img read more