Opinion ID: 1603815
Heading Depth: 2
Heading Rank: 1

Heading: Davey's Divorce from the Firm

Text: The shareholders of the firm agreed on June 6, 1984, that Davey would cease to be a partner after June 30, 1984, and that all members would confer ASAP to inventory his contingent fee cases to determine the percentage of completion. Davey would be paid on a pro-rata basis on all cases partially completed by June 30; those cases on which he performed no work by that date would be reassigned. Davey and Douglass could not agree, however, on the amount Davey was to be paid for his share in the ownership of the building housing the firm. Davey and Douglass disagreed vehemently on this topic and this caused Davey's relationship with the firm to rapidly deteriorate. The firm ultimately presented Davey with a lock-out letter on September 1, 1984, delivered to Davey's doorstep and discovered by his children. The letter was signed by the partners and advised Davey that he was being expelled from the firm, that he would lose his health and malpractice insurance, and that the locks to his office would be changed. This issue of Davey's share in the building was ultimately resolved in Davey's favor in a civil lawsuit. Davey was elected judge on September 4, 1984, with his term to begin on January 8, 1985. The members of the firm entered into a second termination agreement on September 20, 1984, wherein Davey agreed that he would take responsibility for completing or reassigning to other attorneys within the firm or other qualified attorneys outside the firm all cases he was handling as of June 6, 1984, and afterwards. Nine years after Davey left the firm, the Judicial Qualifications Commission (the Commission) filed the present charges against him alleging violations of Canons 1 [1] and 2A [2] of the Florida Code of Judicial Conduct based on his handling of two cases during the breakup of the firm.