Title: The Florida Bar v. David Adolphus Bartholf
Citation: N/A
Docket Number: SC94-897
State: Florida
Issuer: Florida Supreme Court
Date: November 30, 2000

1  Florida Lawyers Assistance, Inc., is a non-profit Florida corporation, funded in part by The
Florida Bar, which assists legal professionals with chemical dependency or psychological problems or
both.
.
Supreme 
Court 
of 
Florida
 
____________
No. SC94897
____________
THE FLORIDA BAR,
Complainant,
vs.
DAVID ADOLPHUS BARTHOLF,
Respondent.
[November 30, 2000]
PER CURIAM.
Respondent David Adolphus Bartholf petitions this Court to review a
referee’s report recommending that he be required to enter into a contract with
Florida Lawyers Assistance, Inc. (“FLA”),1 and serve a one-year probationary
period as conditions of his discipline.  We have jurisdiction.  See art. V, § 15, Fla.
Const.
-2-
Bartholf was charged with aggravated assault for assaulting an individual with
a golf cart and golf club at the Hyde Park Golf Course in Jacksonville, Florida.
Bartholf pled guilty to the lesser offense of battery and the assault charge was
dropped.  As a condition of his criminal probation, Bartholf attended a class on
anger management and was screened by Gateway Community Services as to any
problems with alcohol.  The evaluation found that alcohol treatment was
unnecessary.  
On February 16, 1999, the Bar filed a complaint against Bartholf and a
request for admissions.  After Bartholf filed his response to the request for
admissions, the Bar moved for summary judgment.  At the hearing on the motion,
the parties agreed that the appropriate discipline should be, at a minimum, a public
reprimand.  However, the Bar further argued that Bartholf should be required to
seek alcohol treatment based upon an evaluation by an FLA-approved physician. 
The physician recommended “intensive outpatient treatment to address [Bartholf’s]
alcohol problem and assist in developing a program to maintain abstinence.” 
Bartholf contested the evaluation.    The parties agreed to the referee entering a
disciplinary recommendation based upon his review of four different evaluations of
Bartholf:  the original evaluation by the FLA-approved physician (which
recommended treatment); a second evaluation by another FLA-approved physician;
-3-
an evaluation by a reviewer of Bartholf’s choice; and the original evaluation by
Gateway.  The latter three concluded that Bartholf was not in need of treatment.
      
In his report, the referee granted the Bar’s motion for summary judgment. 
The referee recommended that Bartholf be found guilty of violating Rules
Regulating the Florida Bar 3-4.3 (prohibiting the “commission by a lawyer of any
act that is unlawful or contrary to honesty and justice.”) and 4-8.4(b) (prohibiting an
attorney from “commit[ing] a criminal act that reflects adversely on the lawyer’s
honesty, trustworthiness, or fitness as a lawyer in other respects.”).    
The referee further recommended the following discipline:  (1) a public
reprimand; (2) that Bartholf be required to contract with FLA to treat his alleged
alcohol problem; (3) if referred to FLA, that he be “placed on probation for one
year and ordered to comply with terms and conditions of the recommended
contract[;]” and (4) payment of the Bar’s costs.  In making this recommendation,
the referee considered the following aggravating factors: (1) an admonishment by a
report of minor misconduct on October 12, 1993; and (2) substantial experience in
the practice of law.  The referee considered the following mitigating factors: (1)
absence of a dishonest or selfish motive; (2) timely good-faith effort to make
restitution or to rectify consequences of misconduct; (3)  full and free disclosure to
disciplinary board or cooperative attitude toward proceedings; (4) interim
-4-
rehabilitation; and (5) remorse.  
Bartholf now files a petition for review.  Neither the Bar nor Bartholf
challenge the referee’s findings of fact regarding the charged misconduct in this
case or his conclusions as to guilt.  Therefore, we find Bartholf guilty of violating
rules 3-4.3 and 4-8.4(b).
Bartholf only challenges the portion of the discipline which requires alcohol
treatment.  In reviewing a referee’s recommended discipline, “our scope of review
is somewhat broader than that afforded to findings of facts because, ultimately, it is
our responsibility to order an appropriate punishment.”  Florida Bar v. Anderson,
538 So. 2d 852, 854 (Fla. 1989).  Having fully reviewed the referee’s report, the
parties’ briefs, and the record below (which includes the four evaluations), we
conclude that Bartholf should not be required to contract with FLA at this time. 
Therefore, we decline to adopt the referee’s report to the extent that it recommends
alcohol treatment.  However, even though we decline to order Bartholf to contract
with FLA, we do find that a probationary period is necessary and adopt the
referee’s report to the extent it recommends that Bartholf be placed on probation
for a one-year period. 
Accordingly, David Adolphus Bartholf is hereby publicly reprimanded.  The
reprimand shall be accomplished by the publication of this opinion.  In addition to
-5-
the reprimand, Bartholf shall serve one year of probation, effective upon the
issuance of this opinion.   Judgment is entered in favor of The Florida Bar, 650
Apalachee Parkway, Tallahassee, FL 32399, for costs from David Adolphus
Bartholf in the amount of $1,320.45, for which sum let execution issue. 
It is so ordered.
WELLS, C.J., and SHAW, ANSTEAD, PARIENTE, LEWIS and QUINCE, JJ.,
concur.
HARDING, J., recused.
NOT FINAL UNTIL TIME EXPIRES TO FILE REHEARING MOTION, AND
IF FILED, DETERMINED.
Original Proceeding - The Florida Bar
John F. Harkness, Jr., Executive Director, John Anthony Boggs, Staff Counsel, and
James N. Watson, Jr., Bar Counsel, Tallahassee, Florida,
       for Complainant
Robert Stuart Willis of Willis & Ferebee, Jacksonville, Florida,
       for Respondent