Title: The Florida Bar v. Escobar

State: florida

Issuer: Florida Supreme Court

Document:

322 So. 2d 25 (1975)
THE FLORIDA BAR, Petitioner,
v.
Marco Tulio ESCOBAR, Respondent.
No. 44004.

Supreme Court of Florida.
July 24, 1975.
Norman K. Schwarz, Leonard Rivkind, Miami Beach, David W. Walters, Miami, Clifford L. Davis, Asst. Staff Counsel, and Richard C. McFarlain, Asst. Director, Tallahassee, for petitioner.
Franklin D. Kreutzer, Wallace, Kreutzer & Breslow, Miami, for respondent.
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:
*26 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; thereafter, this Court appointed Judge Francis X. Knuck as Referee and directed that he 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 report of the Referee 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 recommendation that Respondent be held in contempt of 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, Marco Tulio Escobar, be and hereby is permanently enjoined from engaging in the acts complained of and from otherwise engaging in the unauthorized practice of law in the State of Florida.
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).