Florida Bar v. Norkin
132 So. 3d 77
| Fla. | 2013Background
- Jeffrey Alan Norkin represented defendants in Ferguson v. Beem (Miami‑Dade County). The Florida Bar filed a complaint alleging repeated unprofessional and antagonistic conduct during the litigation.
- Transcripts, emails, letters, and testimony show Norkin repeatedly yelled at judges, made disparaging public statements about opposing counsel Gary Brooks, and sent a letter to Senior Judge David Tobin accusing him (without support) of a "cozy, conspiratorial" relationship and threatening suit to avoid payment.
- The referee found Norkin violated multiple Rules Regulating the Florida Bar (including rules prohibiting disruptive tribunal conduct, false statements about judges, and conduct prejudicial to the administration of justice), and recommended a 90‑day suspension plus 18 months probation and a mental‑health evaluation.
- Aggravating factors: prior public reprimand and similar federal‑court sanctions, pattern of misconduct, multiple offenses, refusal to acknowledge wrongdoing, hostility during the disciplinary process.
- Mitigation: claimed personal/mental health issues, some cooperation with the referee, interim rehabilitation efforts, and partial remorse.
- The Court approved guilt findings, rejected the 90‑day suspension, and imposed a two‑year suspension, a public reprimand to be administered before the Court, post‑reinstatement probation (18 months), mandatory mental‑health evaluation and counseling as recommended, and costs.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument (The Florida Bar) | Defendant's Argument (Norkin) | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether Norkin violated rule 4‑8.2(a)/4‑8.4(a) by making false or reckless statements about a judge (Tobin) | Bar: Norkin made unsupported, reckless accusations to coerce Tobin to withdraw a garnishment; evidence shows no conspiracy | Norkin: statements were not accusations of corruption; were justified or non‑actionable | Court: Found statements made with reckless disregard; guilty of violating 4‑8.2(a) and 4‑8.4(a) |
| Whether Norkin disrupted tribunals in violation of rule 4‑3.5(c) | Bar: transcripts show repeated yelling, antagonism, and interruptions that impaired hearings | Norkin: voice is naturally loud, apologized, in therapy; conduct not disrespectful | Court: Transcript and witness evidence establish intentional disruptive and antagonistic behavior; guilty of 4‑3.5(c) |
| Whether Norkin violated rule 4‑8.4(d) by disparaging and humiliating opposing counsel | Bar: multiple emails, letters, public outbursts and hallway statements knowingly disparaged Brooks and humiliated him publicly | Norkin: provocation by Brooks and client justified behavior; blames Brooks for his conduct | Court: Conduct was knowingly or callously disparaging and prejudicial to administration of justice; guilty of 4‑8.4(d) |
| Appropriate sanction (referee: 90‑day suspension; parties disagree) | Bar: one‑year suspension plus public reprimand | Norkin: only a public reprimand is warranted | Court: Increased sanction to two‑year suspension, public reprimand, probation on reinstatement, mental‑health evaluation/counseling, and costs — suspension effective in 30 days to allow client protection |
Key Cases Cited
- Fla. Bar v. Abramson, 3 So.3d 964 (Fla. 2009) (discipline for discourteous, disrespectful behavior toward a judge; 91‑day suspension imposed in analogous context)
- Fla. Bar v. Ratiner, 46 So.3d 35 (Fla. 2010) (suspension and public reprimand for outburst and conduct prejudicial to administration of justice)
- Fla. Bar v. Tobkin, 944 So.2d 219 (Fla. 2006) (discipline for public unprofessional outburst toward opposing counsel and staff; 91‑day suspension)
- Fla. Bar v. Forrester, 916 So.2d 647 (Fla. 2005) (4‑8.4(d) violation where attorney made knowingly false, disparaging statements)
- Fla. Bar v. Temmer, 753 So.2d 555 (Fla. 1999) (standard for appellate review of referee’s recommended discipline)
- Fla. Bar v. Knowles, 99 So.3d 918 (Fla. 2012) (escalating pattern of misconduct warrants increased suspension)