The Florida Bar v. Glant

645 So. 2d 962 (1994)

Purchase the Printed Copy at bsmsphd.com

Nature of the Case

To access this section all you need to do is click here and register.

Facts

When D began working at CFLS in 1991, she was assigned to represent a mother with four minor children (two boys and two girls) in a custody action against the father. The mother wanted to end the Department of Health and Rehabilitative Services' (HRS) supervision of the children and to retain custody of her two girls. At one point, all four children had been removed from the father's home after allegations of sexual abuse. The record reflects that HRS did not litigate those allegations because of insufficient evidence. D knew the mother did not want custody of all four children. After a hearing, based on her belief that the father was sexually abusing the girls, D sent a letter to HRS in Tallahassee requesting further investigation. She included a copy of an unfiled motion for custody modification, which asked that the mother be given custody of all four children. D claims that she felt obligated to send the letter and unfiled motion to HRS because of rule 4-1.2(d), which prohibits a lawyer from assisting a client in criminal or fraudulent conduct. She also relied on rule 4-1.6(b) 4 as a defense. Glant said she thought HRS's continued supervision of the girls would prevent sexual abuse. She argues that she would have assisted the mother in criminal conduct by knowingly placing the children in a situation where they could be sexually assaulted. Under rule 4-1.16, D could have terminated her representation, but she chose not to do so. D was asked to resign after she sent HRS the letter and motion. D challenges the referee's recommendations. D claims that there is no substantial, competent evidence in the record to support the referee's finding that she violated rule 4-1.2.