Title: The Florida Bar v. Thorpe
Citation: 337 So. 2d 392
Docket Number: 49246
State: Florida
Issuer: Florida Supreme Court
Date: September 9, 1976

337 So. 2d 392 (1976)
THE FLORIDA BAR, Complainant,
v.
David W. THORPE, Respondent.
No. 49246.

Supreme Court of Florida.
September 9, 1976.
David A. Maney, Bar Counsel, Tampa, and James P. Hollaway, Asst. Staff Counsel, Tallahassee, for complainant.
Michael J. Mekstraitis, Sarasota, for respondent.
PER CURIAM.
Disciplinary proceedings before a referee concluded with certain findings of fact and recommendations, which are set forth below. As to Count I, alleged violation of DR 2-110(A)(2) and (3) (withdrawal from employment), the referee found:
The referee recommended that respondent "be found not guilty of violating DR 2-110(A)(2) and (3)."
As to Count II, alleged violation of DR 6-101(A)(1), (2), and (3) (failing to act competently), the referee found:
The referee recommended that respondent "be found not guilty under DR 6-101(A)(1) ... [but] guilty of violation of DR 6-101(A)(2) and (3)."
As to Count III, alleged violation of DR 7-101(A)(1), (2), and (3) (representing a client zealously), the referee found:
The referee recommended that respondent "be found not guilty of violating DR 7-101(A)(1) and (3) ... [but] guilty of violating DR 7-101(A)(2)."
As to Count IV, alleged violation of DR 7-102(A)(2) (representing a client within the bounds of the law), the referee found:
The referee recommended that the respondent "be found guilty of violation of DR 7-102(A)(2)."
On the question of appropriate discipline, the referee recommended:
Through counsel, respondent indicated that "he will not appeal the decision of the referee and he will accept that decision."
Accordingly, this opinion shall be published in the Southern Reporter, and such publication shall constitute a public reprimand; respondent is hereby placed on probation for a period of three years, beginning at the end of the probationary period previously imposed for an earlier disciplinary infraction; respondent shall continue to report quarterly to the clerk as to the type and status of each case in his office, so long as he is on probation; respondent shall associate experienced counsel on any matter in which he is inexpert, so long as he is on probation; and respondent shall pay the costs of these proceedings in the amount of $633.20.
It is so ordered.
OVERTON, C.J., and ROBERTS, ADKINS and HATCHETT, JJ., concur.
BOYD, J., concurs specially with an opinion.
BOYD, Justice (concurring specially).
I concur in the majority opinion which finds respondent guilty of misconduct, but because his clients apparently suffered little or no economic detriment, and a good faith effort was made to correct his error, I would limit the discipline to a private reprimand and payment of costs.