417 So.3d 230
Fla.2025Background
- Jerry Girley (managing partner) and Brooke Lynnette Girley (of counsel), both with the Girley Law Firm, were found guilty of professional misconduct.
- The conduct arose after Brooke and Jerry made public statements on social media and in interviews criticizing Judge Weiss for overturning a $2.75 million jury verdict for their client, Baiywo Rop, a Black physician alleging discrimination by Adventist Health System.
- Their statements accused Judge Weiss and the Fifth District Court of Appeal of racial bias, with both implying racially motivated injustice and calling for public action against the judge.
- Judge Weiss faced harassment and death threats as a direct result of these statements, prompting heightened security.
- Both were suspended for 30 days and ordered to pay costs; Jerry was also required to attend a Professionalism Workshop.
Issues
| Issue | Florida Bar's Argument | Girleys' Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Did Respondents violate Rule 4-8.2(a) by impugning judicial integrity? | The Girleys made reckless, unfounded public accusations against Judge Weiss and the DCA. | Statements were protected free speech and reflected systemic bias, not personal attacks. | Yes, reckless public statements impugning judicial integrity violated Rule 4-8.2(a). |
| Did Respondents violate Rule 3-4.3 (Misconduct)? | Their conduct was contrary to honesty and justice. | Arguments not specified beyond due process/freedom of speech. | Yes, conduct violated Rule 3-4.3. |
| Did Respondents violate their Oath of Admission? | Public campaign against judge undermined respect for the judiciary. | Speech was legitimate protest against injustice. | Yes, campaign against Judge Weiss violated their oath. |
| Did Girley violate Rule 4-8.4(d) (Prejudicial conduct to justice)? | Jerry’s statements resulted in threats and harm to the judiciary. | Statements were about systemic issues, not specific incitement. | Yes, Jerry violated 4-8.4(d); his conduct prejudiced the administration of justice. |
| Did Jerry violate Rule 4-4.1(a) (False statements to others)? | Jerry made false statements in interview context. | No proof statements made in course of representing client. | No, evidence insufficient for violation. |
| Were Respondents denied due process/fair notice? | Adequate notice and opportunity to be heard was provided. | Complaints didn't give fair notice; evidence improperly excluded. | No due process violation. |
| Do these sanctions violate First Amendment free speech rights? | Lawyer speech can be regulated to preserve judicial integrity. | Sanctioning lawyer speech chills legitimate criticism. | No First Amendment violation for reckless false attacks. |
Key Cases Cited
- Bradley v. Fisher, 80 U.S. 335 (obligation of attorneys to maintain respect for courts and avoid insulting out-of-court language about judges)
- Williams-Yulee v. Fla. Bar, 575 U.S. 433 (restrictions on lawyer speech to protect judicial integrity serve compelling state interests)
- Ricks v. Loyola, 822 So. 2d 502 (Fla. 2002) (trial judges may reserve ruling on directed verdicts until after jury verdict)
- State v. Lewis, 656 So. 2d 1248 (Fla. 1994) (judges cannot be compelled to testify about their judicial reasoning)
- Fla. Bar v. Ray, 797 So. 2d 556 (lawyer discipline for undermining public confidence in the judiciary)
- Fla. Bar v. Shoureas, 913 So. 2d 554 (evidence required for bar rule violations)
- Fla. Bar v. McCallum, 2019 WL 6873032 (attorney suspension for unfounded accusations against judges - note: skip if no official reporter)