The Florida Bar v. Robert Joseph Ratiner, 238 So. 3d 117

Robert J. Ratiner, admitted 1990, faced a Florida Bar complaint for disruptive and unprofessional conduct during post-trial proceedings in Sidran v. DuPont (events in 2011–2012). The referee found multiple instances of misconduct including saying “lie, lie, lie,” repeatedly kicking opposing counsel’s table, throwing documents, and generally disruptive, intimidating behavior.
The referee found violations of Bar Rules: 4-3.5(c) (disrupting a tribunal), 4-8.4(a) (misconduct/violations of the Rules), and 4-8.4(d) (conduct prejudicial to the administration of justice).
The referee identified aggravating factors: prior disciplinary offenses, a pattern of misconduct, refusal to acknowledge wrongdoing, and substantial experience; mitigators included lack of dishonest motive, character testimony, and a claimed illness.
Ratiner had two prior disciplinary matters involving similar disruptive or disrespectful conduct against opposing counsel and court personnel: one resulted in a 60-day suspension plus reprimand and probation; the second resulted in a three-year suspension.
The referee recommended a three-year suspension to run consecutively to the earlier three-year suspension (effectively six years). The Florida Bar sought disbarment; Ratiner sought concurrent suspension or lesser discipline.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument (The Florida Bar)	Defendant's Argument (Ratiner)	Held
Whether referee’s factual findings of disruptive conduct are supported	Witness testimony and record show Ratiner said “lie, lie, lie” and kicked table; findings supported	Denied or did not recall the conduct; disputed witness accounts	Court affirmed referee: findings supported by competent, substantial evidence; credibility determinations upheld
Whether violations of Bar Rules 4-3.5(c), 4-8.4(a), 4-8.4(d) were proven	Conduct disrupted tribunal and was prejudicial; multiple rule violations warranted findings	Denied incidents; claimed zealous advocacy and lack of intent	Court held violations proven and approved referee’s guilt recommendations
Appropriate sanction: consecutive three-year suspension vs disbarment	Bar urged disbarment due to prior suspensions and repeated similar misconduct	Ratiner sought concurrent suspension or lesser sanction; claimed delays/remoteness mitigate	Court disapproved consecutive suspension as contrary to Standards and held disbarment appropriate given cumulative, escalating, similar misconduct
Whether mitigating factors (delay, remoteness) reduce sanction	Bar argued misconduct pattern and refusal to acknowledge wrongdoing justify severe sanction	Ratiner argued delay in filing and temporal remoteness mitigate	Court rejected delay/remoteness as mitigating here and sustained referee’s aggravating findings; disbarred Ratiner

Fla. Bar v. Ratiner, 46 So. 3d 35 (Fla. 2010) (earlier discipline for disruptive deposition conduct)
Fla. Bar v. Ratiner, 177 So. 3d 1274 (Fla. 2015) (prior three-year suspension for similar misconduct)
Fla. Bar v. Vining, 761 So. 2d 1044 (Fla. 2000) (disbarment appropriate after repeated similar suspensions)
Fla. Bar v. Walkden, 950 So. 2d 407 (Fla. 2007) (progressive sanctions can culminate in disbarment for repeated misconduct)
Fla. Bar v. Norkin, 132 So. 3d 77 (Fla. 2013) (professionalism requirement; disfavor of abusive, disrespectful conduct)
Fla. Bar v. Glueck, 985 So. 2d 1052 (Fla. 2008) (court will not overturn referee credibility findings when supported by competent substantial evidence)
Fla. Bar v. Anderson, 538 So. 2d 852 (Fla. 1989) (appellate court’s responsibility to determine appropriate sanction)