by Mike Sharkey
Staff Writer
Like it or not, attorneys must contend with the ever-present public perception that the practice of law has its flaws.
Ironically, it’s predominantly a group of lawyers that monitors its peers. And, that group is charged with assuring lawyers stay on the up-and-up and those who don’t are publicly reprimanded.
The Florida Bar Grievance Committee is comprised of 20 members of the Bar’s 50-plus-member Board of Governors. Committee members are appointed on a yearly basis by the incoming Bar president-elect, but they don’t end up on the committee by accident or the whim of the incoming president-elect. They want to serve.
“I love it,” said Grier Wells, of Gray Robinson.
Wells was appointed to the Bar’s Disciplinary Review Committee, a subcommittee of the Grievance Committee, in 2001 by then incoming Bar president-elect Todd Aronovitz. He’s been re-appointed every year since.
Locally, Wells is the designated reviewer for two of the Fourth Judicial Circuit’s four grievance committees. He said the number of committees within each circuit is determined by the number of attorneys in the circuit. Wells reviews cases for committees C and D. Brian Kelly of Shorstein & Kelly is the chair of committee D.
“I preside over the meetings and assign the complaints,” said Kelly, who oversees a committee of 10 that includes three non-lawyers and meets monthly. “It’s a good cross section that runs the gamut (of attorneys). Some have served before.”
Both Kelly and Wells said the biggest complaint the grievance committees get is from clients upset with the lack of communication from their attorney.
“A lot of times what we do is send the attorney a letter of advice asking them to address the issue,” explained Kelly, who is serving his second stint on the local committee and will serve as chair of committee D until November of next year.
“Effective communication is a lawyer’s biggest problem,” said Wells. “When I was in law school it was not discussed at all. It may be now.
“Communication is the largest volume of cases, and it can be serious, but it’s not the most egregious.”
Kelly explained that there’s a relatively simple process for his committee to hear cases and decide the fate of an attorney. The Bar receives a complaint about a lawyer and decides if there’s merit to the complaint. If so, it’s assigned to the local committee where the attorney is practicing.
“I review it and assign it to either a lawyer or a non-lawyer,” said Kelly, adding the next step is to speak with the attorney directly and review the records from the case. “It then goes back to the committee in the form of a report. Sometimes there’s a hearing, sometimes we proceed without a hearing.
“If there’s no probable cause, we send a letter of advice to the lawyer telling them we don’t condone their conduct and to avoid this problem in the future.
“If there’s probable cause, the Bar Council takes over and a referee — a judge — is assigned.”
While communication problems may be the most common professional violations lawyers are found guilty of, communication hardly makes headlines. Stealing money from clients does.
Over the course of the past several years, Wells has seen his share of major violations.
“One sticks out in particular, and a lot leave you shaking your head wondering how in the world does this happen,” said Wells. “This is public record, but there’s an attorney in Miami who essentially stole $13 million to $14 million in settlements from his clients. That case has sent shockwaves through the profession and the judicial system. He got 15 years in prison.”
Wells related another case in which an attorney was suspended for a lengthy period of time despite the fact he technically wasn’t guilty of anything. According to Wells, an attorney from Volusia County graduated from law school and joined his father’s small firm. The father either died or retired — Wells couldn’t recall — and left the practice to his son.
“There was a longtime office manager or bookkeeper and over the years she had stolen $750,000,” said Wells, explaining that the manager was so well-trusted the young lawyer never gave a second thought to signing anything she put on his desk. It turned out he was signing checks made out to her.
“He didn’t steal a penny himself, but it was decided he had an obligation to make sure no one in the office was stealing,” said Wells. “He had to close the practice, it cost him a divorce and he’s living in a mobile home.
“Lawyers can be trusting souls and we tend to trust those around us. Sometimes it can come back to bite us.
“We debated that case over several Board of Governor’s meetings about what ought to occur penalty-wise. Some recommended we suspend him for 30 days, others for two years. It ended up somewhere in the middle.”
Both Kelly and Wells said serving on the Grievance Committee is beneficial.
“I really do enjoy it. It’s my way of giving back to the Bar,” said Kelly.
Wells said serving may not make him a better attorney, but “it sure keeps you in tune with the things lawyers ought not to be doing.”