Case Title: The Florida Bar v. Moreno-Santana

Citation: 322 So. 2d 13

Docket Number: 

State: florida

Court: Florida Supreme Court

Date: 1975-07-24T00:00:00Z

Document:
322 So. 2d 13 (1975)
THE FLORIDA BAR, Petitioner,
v.
Arturo Dominador MORENO-SANTANA, Respondent.
No. 44008.

Supreme Court of Florida.
July 24, 1975.
*14 R. Layton Mank, Miami, Leonard Rivkind, Miami Beach, David W. Walters, Miami, Clifford L. Davis, Asst. Staff Counsel, and Richard C. McFarlain, Asst. Director, Tallahassee, for petitioner.
Arturo Dominador Moreno-Santana, in pro per.
PER CURIAM.
This cause is before us on the petition of The Florida Bar filed pursuant to Article XVI of the Integration Rule and charging Respondent with the unauthorized practice of law. Article II, Section 2, of the Integration Rule provides:
Our jurisdiction to prohibit the unauthorized practice of law stems from Article V, Section 15, Florida Constitution, which provides that this Court "shall have exclusive jurisdiction to regulate the admission of persons to the practice of law... ." This constitutional authority necessarily includes the power to prevent the unauthorized practice of law.[1]
We issued a Rule to Show Cause, to which Respondent filed his answer, whereupon this Court appointed Judge Francis X. Knuck as Referee and directed that he should hold such hearings and take such testimony as might be necessary to establish the facts of the case. After a hearing the Referee entered the following findings of fact:
Additionally, the Referee made the following recommendations:
The record and the Referee's report have been examined by this Court. We hereby approve the Referee's finding of guilt and agree that the foregoing conduct on Respondent's part constitutes the unauthorized practice of law. Furthermore, we adopt the Referee's recommendations, *16 find that Respondent is in contempt of this Court and assess a fine against him in the amount of two hundred and fifty dollars ($250.00) to be paid to the Clerk of this Court plus the costs of these proceedings. It is further ordered that Respondent, Arturo Dominador Moreno-Santana, be and he hereby is permanently enjoined from engaging in the unauthorized practice of law.
It is so ordered.
ADKINS, C.J., and ROBERTS, BOYD, OVERTON and ENGLAND, JJ., concur.
[1]  State ex rel. Florida Bar v. Sperry, 140 So. 2d 587 (Fla. 1962), judgment vacated on other grounds 373 U.S. 379, 83 S. Ct. 1322, 10 L. Ed. 2d 428 (1963).