Title: The Florida Bar v. Robert L. Travis, Jr. Revised

State: florida

Issuer: Florida Supreme Court

Document:

Supreme 
Court 
of 
Florida
 
____________
No. SC93559
____________
THE FLORIDA BAR,
Complainant,
vs.
ROBERT L. TRAVIS, JR.,
Respondent.
[January 27, 2000]
REVISED OPINION
PER CURIAM.
We have for review the referee's report regarding ethical breaches committed
by Robert L. Travis, Jr.  The referee recommends that Travis be suspended for
ninety days for misappropriating trust fund accounts.  The Florida Bar has petitioned
for review, seeking disbarment.  We have jurisdiction.  Art. V, § 15, Fla. Const.  For
the reasons expressed, we disbar Travis.  
BACKGROUND
Pursuant to a request from the Second Judicial Circuit Grievance Committee,
Travis's trust account was audited by The Florida Bar for the period of January 1,
1996, through December 31, 1997.  Travis's trust account showed various shortages
-2-
during that period, with a shortage of $22,209.47 as of December 31, 1997.  Travis
admitted that if his trust account were audited for 1998, his account probably would
be short by an additional $1,500.  The audit revealed that payments in the amount of
$35,850, which were not authorized by clients, were made to Travis during the
years 1996 and 1997.  Based on the audit, the Bar filed a complaint against Travis,
alleging several violations of the Rules Regulating The Florida Bar.  Travis filed an
answer admitting the Bar's charges.  The referee entered a summary judgment as to
Travis's guilt, and a disciplinary hearing was held.
At the hearing, the evidence showed that Travis had shared a trust account
with a colleague who owed Travis money for utilities and other monies borrowed
from Travis.  In anticipation of receiving payment from the colleague, Travis wrote
himself checks out of his trust account.  One check was written to Travis's daughter
for a trip to Costa Rica.  Shortages in Travis's trust account were from funds held by
Travis for the payment of his clients' creditors or monies remaining  after Travis
successfully obtained reductions from these creditors on behalf of his clients.
Travis testified that in 1995 he won a Lexus and $5,000 in Biloxi,
Mississippi, as well as $17,000 in the Fantasy Five, a Florida Lottery game.  Travis
sold the Lexus for $30,000.  Travis admitted earning approximately $150,000 in
1995, including his winnings, and used a portion of that money to purchase a new
-3-
home.  Travis's new home was worth $210,000 and placed into his wife's name with
a $50,000 mortgage.  Travis did not pay back his trust account, had not made any
substantial effort for arrangements to pay back the trust account at the time of the
final disciplinary hearing, and had not told his clients that any money was owed to
them.
Many witnesses, including three circuit court judges and several attorneys,
testified in support of Travis's character and fitness to practice law.  Other witnesses
testified as to Travis's contribution to the legal profession and to his community
during his twenty-eight-year legal career.  Travis's psychiatrist testified that Travis
was suffering from depression during the period covered by  the audit.  
REFEREE'S FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS
The referee found that money entrusted to Travis for a specific purpose was
not properly held in trust and applied only to that purpose, in violation of rule 5-1.1. 
The referee also found that Travis failed to maintain the minimum trust accounting
records required by rule 5-1.2(b) and failed to follow minimum trust accounting
procedures in violation of rule 5-1.2(c).  
The referee recommended that Travis receive a ninety-day suspension
followed by three years' probation.  The referee also recommended Travis pay costs
of $2,794.58, pay restitution, participate in LOMAS, complete the trust account
-4-
course offered by the Bar, and continue mental health counseling and medication as
directed by Travis's doctor.  
In making his recommendation, the referee found factors in aggravation as
follows:  (1) due to his substantial experience in the practice of law, Travis knew
that using his trust account for personal matters was wrong; (2) he exposed clients
to substantial risk; (3) he has not yet made restitution; and (4) he had made a
payment from his trust account to his daughter for a trip to Costa Rica.  In
mitigation, the referee found:  (1) Travis had no prior disciplinary record; (2) he had
experienced personal or emotional problems; (3) he cooperated during the
proceedings; (4) he provided twenty-eight years of exceptional service to the
profession of law and the community; and (5) he served indigent clients for many
years and established legal services for the poor.
ANALYSIS
Due to Travis's admission of the charges against him, the sole issue before
this Court is whether the referee's recommended ninety-day suspension is an
appropriate discipline for Travis's conduct.  As previously stated, the Bar seeks
disbarment.  While a referee's recommendation for discipline is persuasive, it is
ultimately this Court's task to determine the appropriate sanction.  See Florida Bar v.
Reed, 644 So. 2d 1355, 1357 (Fla. 1994).  
-5-
We have repeatedly held that the misuse of client funds held in trust is one of
the most serious offenses a lawyer can commit and that disbarment is presumed to
be the appropriate punishment.  See Florida Bar v. Tillman, 682 So.2d 542
(Fla.1996); Florida Bar v. Shanzer, 572 So. 2d 1382 (Fla. 1991).  While this Court
has held in isolated cases that this presumption can be rebutted by mitigating
evidence, see id. at 1383, we find the mitigation in this case insufficient to reduce
the presumed discipline.
The overwhelming majority of cases involving the misuse of client funds have
resulted in disbarment regardless of the mitigation present.  See Shanzer, 572 So. 2d
at 1383, and cases cited therein.  In determining whether disbarment is the
appropriate punishment in a case involving the misappropriation of trust account
funds, we emphasize that our focus is upon the circumstances of the
misappropriation.  The presumption of disbarment is exceptionally weighty when
the attorney's misuse is intentional rather than a result of neglect or inadvertence. 
See Tillman, 682 So. 2d at 543; Florida Bar v. McIver, 606 So. 2d 1159 (Fla.
1992); Florida Bar v. Shuminer, 567 So. 2d 430 (Fla. 1990). 
In cases involving isolated incidents of misappropriation, this Court has found
the presumption of disbarment rebutted when mitigation such as cooperation,
restitution, and the absence of a past disciplinary record exist.  See Florida Bar v.
-6-
Thomas, 698 So. 2d 530 (Fla. 1997).  Although these factors are necessary, they do
not, in and of themselves, serve to overcome the presumption of disbarment.  In this
case, Travis did cooperate with the Bar and has no past disciplinary record.  Travis
did not make restitution when he apparently could have, but has now begun
restitution.  
In this case, we also recognize the substantial evidence of Travis's
contribution to the community and his otherwise exemplary record.  Though we
commend the past good works that Travis has performed, we expressly hold as we
did in Florida Bar v. Aaron, 606 So. 2d 623 (Fla. 1992), that such good works do
not overcome Travis's pattern of conduct in which he intentionally misappropriated
client funds for his own use.  We again expressly state for the benefit of the
members of the Bar that stealing from a client, which is what the taking of trust
account funds plainly is, cannot be overcome merely because the attorney has
committed prior good works and has no prior disciplinary history.  See Florida Bar
v. Smiley, 622 So. 2d 465 (Fla. 1993); Aaron, 606 So. 2d at 624.  An attorney does
not perform such good works so that they can be used as a credit against such
severe misconduct.  The public has a right to have confidence that all lawyers who
are members of The Florida Bar are deserving of their trust in every transaction.   
Travis cites Florida Bar v. Mitchell, 645 So. 2d 414 (Fla. 1994), and Florida
-7-
Bar v. Cramer, 643 So. 2d 1069 (Fla. 1994), in support of the referee's
recommended ninety-day suspension.  These cases are distinguishable from the
instant case.  In Mitchell, the attorney's trust account violations were technical in
nature, unlike Travis's substantial misappropriation of funds for his personal use. 
Mitchell, 645 So. 2d at 416.  In Cramer, the attorney used his trust account to
conceal personal funds from the Internal Revenue Service, and in the single instance
of misappropriating a client's funds, the money was replaced and the client was
unharmed.  Cramer, 643 So. 2d at 1073.  In this case, Travis did not make
restitution and, rather than a single incident, Travis engaged in a pattern of misusing
clients' funds over a substantial period of time.
Accordingly, we disbar Robert L. Travis, Jr., for a period of five years, nunc
pro tunc to the effective date of his suspension.  Travis may petition the Florida
Board of Bar Examiners for readmission five years from the date of his suspension. 
Judgment is entered for The Florida Bar, 650 Apalachee Parkway, Tallahassee,
Florida 32399, for recovery of costs from Robert L. Travis, Jr., in the amount of
$2,794.58, for which sum let execution issue.
It is so ordered.
HARDING, C.J., and SHAW, WELLS, ANSTEAD, PARIENTE, LEWIS and
QUINCE, JJ., concur.
-8-
THE FILING OF A MOTION FOR REHEARING SHALL NOT ALTER THE
EFFECTIVE DATE OF THIS DISBARMENT.
Original Proceeding - The Florida Bar
John F. Harkness, Jr., Executive Director, John Anthony Boggs, Staff Counsel,
April Dawn Douglas, Bar Counsel and Donald M. Sprangler, Co-Bar Counsel,
Tallahassee, Florida,
       for Complainant
Richard A. Greenberg, Tallahassee, Florida,
       for Respondent