183 So. 3d 1018
Fla.2015Background
- Jeffrey Alan Norkin had been suspended by this Court (opinion issued Oct. 31, 2013) and was ordered to comply with Rule Regulating the Florida Bar 3-5.1(h) (notice to clients/opposing counsel/courts and sworn affidavit to bar counsel within 30 days).
- The Florida Bar filed a petition for contempt and amended it to allege Norkin failed to timely file the required affidavit and that he practiced law after the suspension by emailing opposing counsel and preparing filings for a client.
- The Bar separately moved for sanctions after Norkin sent threatening and disparaging emails to bar counsel and displayed contemptuous behavior during his public reprimand.
- The referee granted the Bar’s motion for summary judgment on the contempt petition (finding no genuine issue of material fact based largely on Norkin’s admissions) and found Norkin violated Rule 4-8.4(d) by disparaging and threatening bar counsel.
- The referee recommended contempt findings and disbarment; this Court reviewed de novo the summary judgment and independently reviewed recommended discipline and ordered permanent disbarment, judgment for costs, and compliance with notice rules.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument (The Florida Bar) | Defendant's Argument (Norkin) | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether Norkin failed to comply with Rule 3-5.1(h) notice/affidavit requirements | Norkin did not furnish required notices or timely file the sworn affidavit; rule triggered upon service/effective date | Motion for rehearing tolled the duties; he delayed but ultimately provided notice | Court held rule triggered on service/effective date; rehearing did not toll; summary judgment for Bar — noncompliance established |
| Whether Norkin practiced law after suspension | Norkin emailed opposing counsel, drafted motions, and had multiple client contacts while suspended | He disputed characterization or significance of contacts | Court found admissions and testimony established unauthorized practice after suspension; summary judgment for Bar |
| Whether Norkin’s emails and conduct warranted sanctions under Rule 4-8.4(d) | Emails called bar counsel “evil/despicable,” threatened litigation; intentional contemptuous conduct at public reprimand | He asserted free speech and expression rights; admitted smirking/staring | Court approved referee: conduct violated 4-8.4(d); sanctions appropriate |
| Appropriate discipline (reprimand, suspension, disbarment, permanent disbarment) | Bar sought permanent disbarment given continued practice while suspended and unrepentant, persistent misconduct | Norkin argued, at most, a public reprimand or lesser discipline | Court concluded disbarment is supported by precedent for practicing while suspended and by Norkin’s unrepentant pattern; ordered immediate permanent disbarment |
Key Cases Cited
- Fla. Bar v. Norkin, 132 So. 3d 77 (Fla. 2013) (prior suspension and public reprimand addressing Norkin’s earlier misconduct)
- Fla. Bar v. Cosnow, 797 So. 2d 1255 (Fla. 2001) (referee may enter summary judgment; standard of review)
- Fla. Bar v. Daniel, 626 So. 2d 178 (Fla. 1993) (procedures governing referee proceedings)
- Fla. Bar v. Lobasz, 64 So. 3d 1167 (Fla. 2011) (disbarment for practicing while suspended)
- Fla. Bar v. Forrester, 916 So. 2d 647 (Fla. 2005) (disbarment for practicing while suspended)
- Fla. Bar v. Rood, 678 So. 2d 1277 (Fla. 1996) (disbarment for practicing while suspended)
- Fla. Bar v. Behm, 41 So. 3d 136 (Fla. 2010) (persistent unrepentant misconduct supports permanent disbarment)
- Fla. Bar v. Carlson, 183 So. 2d 541 (Fla. 1966) (permanent disbarment where respondent is beyond redemption)
- Fla. Bar v. Temmer, 753 So. 2d 555 (Fla. 1999) (court’s review of referee discipline must have reasonable basis in precedent and standards)
- Fla. Bar v. Martocci, 791 So. 2d 1074 (Fla. 2001) (discipline for insulting gestures and disparaging conduct)
- Fla. Bar v. Buckle, 771 So. 2d 1131 (Fla. 2000) (humiliating/intimidating communications violate professional conduct rules)