Legal Opinion · Concurring in part, dissenting in part

The Florida Bar v. Peter M. MacNamara

Supreme Court of Florida

Decided January 9, 2014No. SC11-1029Published

1Concurring in part, dissenting in partCanady, J.

I concur with the majority’s decision to approve the referee’s findings of fact and recommendations of guilt. The record overwhelmingly supports the conclusion that Peter M. MacNamara violated Rules Regulating the Florida Bar 4-1.4 (communication); 4-8.1 (maintaining the integrity of the profession); and 4-8.4(c) (a lawyer shall not engage in conduct involving dishonesty, fraud, deceit, or misrepresentation). In addition, I concur with the majority’s rejection of the finding that MacNamara’s misconduct did not cause harm or prejudice to his client. But I dissent from the majority’s decision…

2Cases cited7 opinions

  1. Florida Bar v. RotsteinSupreme Court of Florida · 2002
  2. The Florida Bar v. KoronesSupreme Court of Florida · 2000
  3. The Florida Bar v. RightmyerSupreme Court of Florida · 1993
  4. The Florida Bar v. CoxSupreme Court of Florida · 2001
  5. The Florida Bar v. GrahamSupreme Court of Florida · 1992

2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API