Opinion ID: 1576034
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 1

Heading: Ramos's Filings and the Order to Show Cause

Text: Despite the resolution of the present case, Ramos persists in filing numerous documents that ignore the dismissal of the petition. Also, in those filings he inappropriately continues to challenge his long-finalized disciplinary cases. Thus, on October 7, 2008, the Clerk of the Court sent Ramos a letter stating that the instant case is final in this Court and no further pleadings may be filed. [2] Nevertheless, since the Court dismissed his petition, Ramos has filed twenty-four documents. [3] The filings have not resulted in relief for Ramos. Thus, in order to limit Ramos's ability to monopolize this Court's time, the Court issued the order to show cause directing Ramos to demonstrate why: this Court should not impose upon you a sanction for abusing the legal system, including, but not limited to directing the Clerk of this Court to reject for filing any future pleadings, petitions, motions, letters, documents, or other filings submitted to this Court by you unless signed by a member of The Florida Bar other than yourself, which in any way challenge the disbarment entered by this Court in the above cases or challenge the disposition of the instant Florida Board of Bar Examiners case. Fla. Bar v. Ramos, No. SC07-2388 (Fla. Mar. 2, 2009). In his response to the order to show cause, Ramos continues to present arguments regarding the petition for readmission case and his finalized disciplinary cases. For example, he asserts that the referee in one of his disciplinary cases held a secret hearing with Bar counsel and his counsel, during which the referee permitted Ramos's counsel to withdraw from representation. Ramos claims his case proceeded before the referee for months, but no one informed him that his counsel had withdrawn. In addition, Ramos fails to comprehend that the Court has disposed of his cases. In fact, Ramos asserts that the Court has not yet dealt with the substantive issues in these cases and, from that point, he complains that the instant case has been pending with the Court for an excessive period of time. Ramos is apparently oblivious to the fact that the Court issued an order dismissing his petition for review on July 14, 2008. Next, in response to the order recognizing that Ramos has submitted numerous frivolous filings, Ramos makes the inapt assertion that he is an industrious professional who is not inclined to frivolity. Further, in his response, Ramos argues that he should be permitted to seek readmission now, even though the disbarment continues until 2017. Ramos fails to acknowledge the extent of his misdeeds and the professional misconduct that caused his disbarment. [4] In fact, Ramos's disciplinary cases resulted in more than one recommendation of disbarment. [5] Ramos cannot evade his sanction by continuing to file numerous documents in this Court. A thorough review of Ramos's response to the order to show cause leads to one conclusion. Ramos has failed to show good cause why sanctions should not be imposed. Indeed, his response suggests that he will continue his practice of repeatedly filing meritless documents because he is incapable of recognizing that his cases are resolved. Ramos has abused the processes of the Court and, by doing so, has hindered the ability of this Court to properly resolve those matters that are properly before it. We conclude that a sanction is merited on this record.