IN THE SUPREME COURT OF FLORIDA (Before a Referee)

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF FLORIDA (Before a Referee) THE FLORIDA BAR, Complainant, Supreme Court Case Nos. SC08-946 SC09-614 v. The Florida Bar File Nos. 2007-51,298(15C) 2008-51,189(15C) A. CLARK CONE, 2008-51,771(15C) and 2009-50,358(15C) Respondent. / REPORT OF REFEREE I. SUMMARY OF PROCEEDINGS: The Florida Bar filed its complaint in The Florida Bar File No. 2007-51,298(15C) with the Supreme Court of Florida on or about May 19, 2008. Thereafter, the undersigned was appointed to preside as referee in this proceeding by order of the Chief Judge of the Seventeenth Judicial Circuit. The Florida Bar filed a second complaint against respondent in The Florida Bar File Nos. 2008-51,189(15C); 2008-51,771(15C); and 2009-50,358(15C) on or about April 1, 2009. I was appointed to serve as referee in that case as well, by Order of the Chief Judge, on April 15, 2009. Respondent was suspended from the practice of law, on an emergency basis, by Order of the Supreme Court of Florida, on March 19, 2009, in Supreme Court Case No. 09-474. He remains suspended, to date.

The parties have presented to me a Guilty Plea and Consent to Immediate Disbarment, which has been approved by The Florida Bar Board of Governors designated reviewer. After due deliberation, I have determined to recommend that respondent s Guilty Plea and Consent to Immediate Disbarment be approved, for the reasons set forth herein. The pleadings and all other papers filed in this cause, which are forwarded to the Supreme Court of Florida with this report, constitute the entire record. For purposes of the plea agreement, respondent was represented by David Roth and The Florida Bar was represented (throughout the proceedings) by Lorraine Christine Hoffmann. II. FINDINGS OF FACT: A. Jurisdictional Statement: Respondent is, and at all times mentioned during this investigation was, a member of The Florida Bar and subject to the jurisdiction and Disciplinary Rules of the Supreme Court of Florida. B. Narrative Summary: Supreme Court Case No. SC08-946 COUNT I A. Respondent hired G. Bryant Buchner (hereinafter Buchner ), of Quest Engineering & Failure Analysis, Inc., to conduct the necessary pretrial analysis and serve as an expert witness at trial. 2

B. Despite many requests by Buchner and his office, respondent failed to timely pay Buchner s bill for services rendered, in advance of trial. C. Due to respondent s failure to pay Buchner for services already rendered on behalf of respondent s client, Buchner advised respondent he would not appear to testify on the date of trial until and unless his outstanding bill was paid. D. On the morning of March 6, 2007, the date on which Buchner was scheduled to testify in respondent s client s trial, respondent gave Buchner a check in the amount of $24,860.29. E. On the morning of March 6, 2007, respondent represented to Buchner that the funds to cover the check were available in his operating account, immediately. F. Based on his past negative experience with respondent, Buchner brought someone with him to court, on March 6, 2007, to negotiate respondent s check before Buchner took the witness stand on behalf of respondent s client. G. When Buchner s assistant went to respondent s bank to cash the check, it was dishonored. H. Buchner learned that respondent s check had been dishonored before he took the witness stand for respondent s client. 3

I. Despite his knowledge that respondent s check was dishonored, Buchner still testified for respondent s client, at trial. J. The Florida Bar charged that, at the time that respondent remitted the check to Buchner on March 6, 2007, respondent knew that he did not have sufficient funds in his law office operating account to cover the amount of the check. K. The Florida Bar also charged that because he knew that he was giving Buchner a check that would be dishonored by his bank, respondent knowingly remitted a worthless check to Buchner (to secure Buchner s testimony for trial), thereby intentionally defrauding him of payment for his service as an expert witness. L. Intentionally issuing a worthless check for services received is a crime under Florida law. COUNT II M. Buchner filed a sworn complaint against respondent, with The Florida Bar. N. Buchner s sworn complaint alleged that respondent knowingly gave him a bad check, and made intentionally false representations to him. O. Throughout The Florida Bar s investigation of Buchner s complaint, respondent advised The Florida Bar that the check he gave to 4

Buchner on March 6, 2007 was dishonored because a certain lawsuit funding company (from which he had obtained the subject funds) failed to wire the necessary funds into respondent s operating account. P. In response to The Florida Bar s repeated requests for same, respondent could produce no tangible evidence to support his claim that a lawsuit funding company was ever involved in this case. Q. In response to The Florida Bar s repeated requests for same, respondent could not provide The Florida Bar with the name of the lawsuit funding company from which he claims to have obtained the funds necessary to cover Buchner s check. R. Based on the foregoing facts, The Florida Bar alleged that respondent made no arrangements with a funding company, or any other party, to obtain funding to cover the bad check he gave to Buchner on March 6, 2007. S. Additionally, The Florida Bar charged that by continuing to assert, during the course of The Florida Bar s investigation, that he had made financial arrangements with a lawsuit funding company (when he knew such assertions to be false), respondent made material misrepresentations to The Florida Bar. 5

T. Finally, The Florida Bar charged that respondent engaged in misconduct prejudicial to the administration of justice, by making intentionally false and/or incomplete statements to The Florida Bar during the course of a disciplinary investigation. Supreme Court Case No. SC09-614 AS TO ALL COUNTS The Florida Bar File No. 2008-51,189(15C) [Complaint of Melody Ashling] 21. Melody Ashling (hereinafter Ashling ), respondent s former employee, filed a sworn Florida Bar complaint alleging that respondent missed the statutes of limitations on two cases he was working on, and that in one of those cases, respondent also forged the client s name (Victor G. Jackson) on an unauthorized notice of voluntary dismissal. 22. Based on Ashling s sworn complaint, The Florida Bar initiated an investigation into the matters presented. 23. Pursuant to this investigation, Fifteenth Judicial Circuit Grievance Committee C issued a subpoena duces tecum, compelling respondent to produce certain trust accounting records to The Florida Bar. 24. Respondent failed and refused to respond to the grievance committee s subpoena duces tecum. 6

25. Accordingly, The Florida Bar obtained the necessary records directly from respondent s bank, pursuant to grievance committee subpoena duces tecum. COUNT I The Florida Bar File No. 2008-51,771(15C) [Complaint of Bonnie Schnorr] 26. Bonnie Lansaw Schnorr (hereinafter Schnorr ), respondent s former client, filed a sworn Florida Bar complaint against respondent. 27. Respondent represented Schnorr in a personal injury case. 28. Respondent settled Schnorr s case in or about 2006. 29. In or about July 2007, respondent received additional settlement funds for Schnorr, in the amount of $38,940.38. 30. The settlement check was made payable to Schnorr and respondent s trust account, jointly. 31. Respondent caused Schnorr to endorse the settlement check, and then deposited it into his trust account. 32. Respondent never disbursed any portion of the $38,940.38 settlement check to Schnorr. 33. Instead, respondent misappropriated Schnorr s funds and converted the full $38,940.38 to his own uses. 7

COUNT II 34. After she endorsed her settlement check, Schnorr made many attempts to communicate with respondent in order to receive her settlement proceeds. 35. Respondent refused to respond to Schnorr s communications and ignored her demands for distribution of her settlement funds. 36. When respondent refused to respond to Schnorr s attempts to communicate with him, Schnorr hired an attorney (Jeffrey A. Levine) to obtain her funds from respondent. 37. Respondent failed and refused to respond to all communications from Schnorr and from Jeffrey A. Levine, and failed to disburse Schnorr s funds to her, to date. COUNT III The Florida Bar File No. 2009-50,358(15C) [Complaint of Anthony and Jo-Ann DePrizio] 38. Jo-Ann and Anthony DePrizio (hereinafter the DePrizios ), respondent s former clients, filed a sworn bar complaint against respondent in September 2008. 39. The DePrizios, who reside in Somerville, Massachusetts, hired respondent to represent them relative to a serious car accident in West Palm Beach, Florida. 8

40. The DePrizios complaint expressed their fear that respondent had failed to file their personal injury lawsuit within the applicable statute of limitations. 41. Upon investigation of this matter, The Florida Bar learned that respondent had settled the DePrizios case, and received three separate settlement checks on their behalf. 42. Respondent received and negotiated the first two checks, each in the amount of $10,000, in September 2004 and in January 2005. 43. In February 2005, respondent caused the DePrizios to sign a release and endorse a settlement check in the amount of $500,000 from AIG Premier Insurance Company. 44. Respondent negotiated the DePrizios $500,000 settlement check in February, 2005. 45. Shortly after he received the DePrizios settlement checks in September 2004 ($10,000), January 2005 ($10,000), and February 2005 ($500,000), respondent misappropriated the DePrizios settlement funds, and converted them to his own uses. 46. Despite their demands for information about their cases and distribution of any funds he had received on their behalf, respondent did not 9

disburse any of their settlement funds, from any source, to the DePrizios until April 2006. 47. In April 2006, respondent disbursed $20,000 to the DePrizios. 48. In April 2006, respondent restituted $20,000 to the DePrizios, via his disbursement to them in that amount. 49. Despite their repeated demands for information about their cases and distribution of any remaining settlement funds, respondent failed and refused to disburse to the DePrizios any of their settlement proceeds, from the $500,000 settlement check he had received from AIG Premier Insurance Company. 50. Despite demands from their successor lawyer (James E. McCall, of Boston, Massachusetts), respondent continued in his refusal to disburse any of their settlement proceeds, from their $500,000 settlement, to the DePrizios. 51. Respondent misappropriated the whole of the DePrizios $500,000 settlement, and converted their funds to his own uses. COUNT IV 52. In investigating Ashling s complaint against respondent, The Florida Bar located and communicated with another of respondent s former clients, Victor Jackson (hereinafter Jackson ). 10

53. Jackson s wife was killed in an airplane crash on April 5, 2004. 54. Jackson hired respondent shortly thereafter, to advance a wrongful death and other actions, on his behalf. 55. Respondent filed an action on Jackson s behalf in Charleston County, South Carolina. 56. Respondent is not, and has never been, licensed to practice law in South Carolina. 57. On May 10, 2006, respondent wrote to Jackson and advised him to settle his claim against the airplane s pilot, and his company, for the $100,000 policy limits offered. 58. Respondent told Jackson, in the same letter, that he would be very vigilant in pursuing the balance of his claim(s). 59. Jackson did not hear from respondent again until January 3, 2007, when he received a letter asking him to immediately sign settlement documents relative to the $100,000 settlement because he was in receipt of a court order requiring [the] return of these documents signed in the next few days. [Emphasis as in the original letter.] 60. Jackson signed the settlement and release agreement, for the $100,000 settlement, and returned it to respondent. 61. Jackson never heard from respondent again. 11

62. During the course of The Florida Bar s investigation of this matter, Jackson learned that respondent had settled his case in June 2006, long before respondent sent Jackson the settlement documents in January 2007. 63. In truth and in fact, Mark R. Guiliani, Esq., of the Law Offices of Kern and Wooley, LLP, sent respondent a letter on June 30, 2006, enclosing a settlement check in the amount of $100,000. 64. At respondent s express request, the check was made payable to The Cone Law Firm Trust Account, and not to respondent and Jackson, jointly. 65. Respondent endorsed and negotiated Jackson s settlement check in July 2006. 66. Respondent never told Jackson that he had received any monies on his behalf. 67. Respondent never distributed any portion of the settlement check to Jackson. 68. Respondent misappropriated Jackson s settlement proceeds, and converted his client s money to his own uses. 12

COUNT V 69. Respondent filed an action on Jackson s behalf in Charleston County, South Carolina. 70. Respondent is not, and has never been, licensed to practice law in South Carolina. 71. Further after settling the case, respondent took a voluntary dismissal of Jackson s civil action in South Carolina, without Jackson s knowledge or approval. 72. Respondent accomplished this by forging respondent s name (or causing another to do so) on a notice of voluntary dismissal that respondent filed with the South Carolina court. COUNT VI 73. During the course of The Florida Bar s investigation of respondent s gross misconduct, as outlined herein, The Florida Bar obtained respondent s trust accounting records from his bank, and conducted a compliance audit of respondent s trust account for the period of June 1, 2006 through June 30, 2008. [This audit period pre-dates respondent s receipt of the DePrizios settlement proceeds, in February 2005.] 74. Florida Bar Staff Auditor Carl Totaro, C.P.A. (hereinafter Totaro ) conducted the aforementioned compliance audit and determined 13

that respondent had significant and multiple shortages in his attorney trust account. 75. Further, Totaro determined that respondent utilized client trust funds for his own purposes or for purposes other than those for which these funds were entrusted to him, thereby converting and/or misappropriating significant amounts of his clients money. 76. The salient points of Totaro s affidavit follow: A. Respondent received funds in trust for Schnorr ($38,940.38) and Jackson ($100,000). B. Respondent distributed no funds to either Schnorr or Jackson. C. Respondent deposited Schnorr s settlement check into his SunTrust Bank trust account on August 3, 2007. D. As of September 30, 2007, respondent s trust account at SunTrust had a zero balance. E. Respondent misappropriated Schnorr s funds, and converted them to his own uses. F. Respondent deposited Jackson s settlement check into his Bank of New York Mellon trust account on June 30, 2006. 14

G. As of July 31, 2006, the Bank of New York Mellon trust account had a balance of $8,168.32. H. As of November 30, 2006, the Bank of New York Mellon trust account had a zero balance. I. Respondent misappropriated Jackson s funds, and converted them to his own uses. J. In addition to the foregoing misappropriations, Totaro s compliance audit revealed that respondent s trust accounts evidenced persistent shortages ranging from $91,842.43 in July 2006 to $309,185.26, at the end of the audit period. K. These shortages were created by respondent s use of client funds for his own purposes, for other clients purposes, or for purposes unrelated to the clients matters. L. Totaro s compliance audit also revealed that respondent regularly transferred funds from his trust accounts to his operating accounts at Bank of New York Mellon and SunTrust, thereby engaging in misappropriation of trust funds. M. Specifically (during the audit period) respondent made online transfers from his trust accounts to his operating and other accounts totaling $309,185.26. 15

N. These transfers of client funds into respondent s own accounts, without a nexus to any client case or matter, created trust account shortages and constitutes conversion. COUNT VII 77. In addition to the foregoing, Totaro s compliance audit demonstrated that respondent failed to maintain minimum trust account records, and failed to follow mandatory trust accounting procedures, as follows: A. Respondent did not create and maintain documentary support for all attorney fee and cost disbursements and bank transfers [5-1.2(b)(4)]; B. Respondent did not maintain a cash receipts and disbursements journal which showed a separate column to identify the client for each transaction, a column that identified the reason for which funds were disbursed or received, and a running balance after each transaction in the journal [5-1.2(b)(5)]; C. Respondent did not properly maintain client ledgers because such ledgers did not identify the disbursement date and the disbursement check number or disbursement bank transfer for attorneys fees and costs and process server costs [5-1.2(b)(6)]; 16

D. Respondent did not create and maintain monthly comparisons of client ledgers and bank balances [5-1.2(c)(1)(B)]; and E. Respondent did not create and maintain an annual detailed list identifying balance of unexpended trust money held for each client/matter [5-1.2(c)(2)]. III. RECOMMENDATION AS TO WHETHER RESPONDENT SHOULD BE FOUND GUILTY: My recommendation as to guilt is as follows: A. As to Supreme Court Case No. SC08-946: Respondent offered no plea to The Florida Bar s charges in this case, but stated, in his (guilty) plea agreement, that it was in his best interest to include this case in his Guilty Plea and Consent to Immediate Disbarment. Based on my review of the pleadings, my knowledge of respondent s own statements during the proceedings, and his appearance before me in this case, I find sufficient evidence to recommend that respondent be found guilty of giving Buchner a dishonored check on the date that Buchner was scheduled to testify on behalf of respondent s client in an important trial. I also find that respondent did not honor and make good on his check to Buchner, until many months after he tendered the original check to him. Accordingly, I recommend that respondent be found guilty of violating R. Regulating Fla. Bar 3-4.2 [Violation of the Rules of Professional Conduct as adopted by the rules governing The Florida Bar is a cause for discipline.]; 3-4.3 [The commission by a 17

lawyer of an act that is unlawful or contrary to honesty and justice, whether the act is committed in the course of the attorney s relations as an attorney or otherwise, whether committed within or outside the state of Florida and whether or not the act is a felony or misdemeanor, may constitute a cause for discipline.]; 4-8.4(a) [A lawyer shall not violate or attempt to violate the Rules of Professional Conduct, knowingly assist or induce another to do so, or do so through the acts of another.]; 4-8.4(c) [A lawyer shall not engage in conduct involving dishonesty, fraud, deceit or misrepresentation.]; and 4-8.4(d) [A lawyer shall not engage in conduct in connection with the practice of law that is prejudicial to the administration of justice ]. B. As to Supreme Court Case No. SC09-614: Based on respondent s guilty plea to the following rule violations, I recommend that respondent be found guilty of violating R. Regulating Fla. Bar 4-1.15 [A lawyer shall comply with the Rules Regulating Trust Accounts.]; 4-1.4(a) [A lawyer shall promptly inform the client of any decision or circumstance with respect to which the client s informed consent, as defined in terminology, is required by these rules; (2) reasonably consult with the client about the means by which the client s objectives are to be accomplished; (3) keep the client reasonably informed about the status of the matter; (4) promptly comply with reasonable requests for information; and (5) consult with the client about any relevant limitation on the lawyer s conduct when 18

the lawyer knows or reasonably should know that the client expects assistance not permitted by the Rules of Professional Conduct or other law.]; 4-1.4(b) [A lawyer shall explain a matter to the extent reasonably necessary to permit the client to make informed decisions regarding the representation.]; 4-3.3(a)(1) [A lawyer shall not knowingly make a false statement of material fact or law to a tribunal.]; 4-5.5(a) [A lawyer shall not practice law in a jurisdiction other than the lawyers home state, in violation of the regulation of the legal profession in that jurisdiction or in violation of the regulation of the legal profession in the lawyer s home state, or assist another in doing so.]; 4-8.4(a) [A lawyer shall not violate or attempt to violate the Rules of Professional Conduct, knowingly assist or induce another to do so, or do so through the acts of another.]; 4-8.4(b) [A lawyer shall not commit a criminal act that reflects adversely on the lawyer s honesty, trustworthiness, or fitness as a lawyer in other respects.]; 4-8.4(c) [A lawyer shall not engage in conduct involving dishonesty, fraud, deceit or misrepresentation.]; 4-8.4(d) [A lawyer shall not engage in conduct in connection with the practice of law that is prejudicial to the administration of justice ]; 5-1.1(a)(1) [A lawyer shall hold in trust, separate from the lawyer s own property, funds and property of clients or third persons that are in a lawyer s possession in connection with a representation. All funds, including advances for fees, costs, and expenses, shall be kept in a separate bank or savings and loan association account maintained in the state 19

where the lawyer s office is situated or elsewhere with the consent of the client or third person and clearly labeled and designated as a trust account. A lawyer may maintain funds belonging to the lawyer in the trust account in an amount no more than is reasonably sufficient to pay bank charges related to the trust account.]; 5-1.1(b) [Money or other property entrusted to an attorney for a specific purpose, including advances for fees, costs, and expenses, is held in trust and must be applied only to that purpose. Money and other property of clients coming into the hands of an attorney are not subject to counterclaim or setoff for attorney s fees, and a refusal to account for and deliver over such property upon demand shall be deemed a conversion.]; 5-1.2(b)(4) [The following are the minimum trust account records that shall be maintained: other documentary support for all disbursements and transfers from the trust account.]; 5-1.2(b)(5) [The following are the minimum trust account records that shall be maintained: a separate cash receipts and disbursements journal including columns for receipts, disbursements, transfers and the account balance and containing at least the identification of the client or matter for which the funds were received, disbursed, or transferred, the date on which all trust funds were received, disbursed, or transferred; the check number for all disbursements and the reason for which all trust funds were received, disbursed or transferred.]; 5-1.2(b)(6) [The following are the minimum trust account records that shall be maintained: A separate file or ledger with an individual card or page 20

for each client or matter showing all individual receipts, disbursements, or transfers and any unexpended balance and containing the identification of the client or matter for which the funds were received, disbursed, or transferred, the date on which all trust funds were received, disbursed, or transferred, the check number for all disbursements and the reason for which all trust funds were received, disbursed, or transferred.]; 5-1.2(c)(1)(B) [The lawyer shall cause to be made monthly a comparison between the total of the reconciled balances of all trust accounts and the total of the trust ledger cards or pages, together with specific descriptions of any differences between the 2 totals and reasons therefor.]; 5-1.2(c)(2) [At least annually, the lawyer shall prepare a detailed listing identifying the balance of the unexpended trust money held for each client or matter.]; and 5-1.2(c)(4) [The lawyer or law firm shall authorize and request any bank or savings and loan association where the lawyer is a signatory on a trust account to notify Staff Counsel, The Florida Bar, in the event any trust check is returned due to insufficient funds or uncollected funds, absent bank error.]. IV. RECOMMENDATION AS TO DISCIPLINARY MEASURES TO BE APPLIED: I recommend that the Supreme Court of Florida accept respondent s guilty plea and consent to immediate disbarment, with leave to reapply in 5 years. I also recommend that respondent be ordered to pay The Florida Bar s costs in this matter, pursuant to The Florida Bar s affidavit of costs, as filed and included in the 21

record. I also recommend that statutory interest should accrue until such costs are paid in full. Before making the foregoing recommendation, I have carefully examined and considered both the applicable case law and the Florida Standards for Imposing Lawyer Sanctions. All such legal authority supports disbarment. Looking first at the case law, it is abundantly clear that disbarment is the presumptive sanction for misappropriation of client funds. See The Florida Bar v. Spear, 887 So.2d 1242 (Fla. 2004); The Florida Bar v. Barley, 831 So.2d 163 (Fla. 2002); and The Florida Bar v. Potter, 684 So.2d 810 (Fla. 1996). In the instant case, where respondent has admitted to stealing more than half a million dollars from his clients, disbarment is the only appropriate sanction. The Florida Standards for Imposing Lawyer Sanctions also clearly support disbarment. Standard 4.11 states that [d]isbarment is appropriate when a lawyer intentionally or knowingly converts client property regardless of injury or potential injury. I further recommend that respondent be required to comply with all terms and conditions he agreed to in his Guilty Plea and Consent to Immediate Disbarment: A. That he will cooperate fully with any future bar investigation(s) that may be initiated relating to any claims that may be filed against him with The Florida Bar s Clients Security Fund; 22

B. That he will submit to a complete audit of his trust account(s), and any other accounts in which he has placed client funds, when and if requested to do so by The Florida Bar, or its designee; C. That he will keep The Florida Bar informed of his current mailing and physical address for two (2) years subsequent to the date of any resulting order in this cause (to aid The Florida Bar s subsequent investigations, if any); D. That he will provide The Florida Bar with a current financial affidavit, on a form to be provided by the Bar within thirty (30) days of the signing of the Guilty Plea and Consent to Immediate Disbarment, including a statement of assets and liabilities; and E. That he will make reasonable efforts to reimburse The Florida Bar s Clients Security Fund if payments are made by the Fund as a result of respondent s misconduct. I recommend that respondent s strict compliance with all of the terms and conditions of his plea agreement be a condition precedent to respondent s eligibility to apply for readmission to The Florida Bar, after the term of his disbarment. 23

V. PERSONAL HISTORY AND PAST DISCIPLINARY RECORD: Before making my disciplinary recommendation, I considered respondent s personal history, his prior disciplinary record, and the applicable mitigation and aggravation under The Florida Standards for Imposing Lawyer Sanctions: A. Personal History of Respondent: Age: 53 Date Admitted to the Bar: September 25, 1981 B. Prior Discipline: Respondent was suspended on an emergency basis by Supreme Court Order dated March 19, 2009. C. Mitigation and Aggravation: Mitigating Factors: None Aggravating Factors: Standard 9.22 (b) dishonest or selfish motive; (i) substantial experience in the practice of law [respondent was admitted to The Florida Bar on September 25, 1981]. VI. STATEMENT OF COSTS AND MANNER IN WHICH COSTS SHOULD BE TAXED: I find that The Florida Bar has incurred reasonable costs in the matter and that same should be assessed against the respondent, with statutory interest, until paid in full. 24

A. Grievance Committee Level Costs: 1. Court Reporter Costs $ - 0-2. Bar Counsel Travel Costs $ - 0 - B. Referee Level Costs: 1. Court Reporter Costs $1,311.65 2. Bar Counsel Travel Costs $ 100.76 C. Administrative Costs $1,250.00 D. Auditor Costs $1,642.50 E. Miscellaneous Costs: 1. Investigator Costs $ 544.01 2. Witness Fees and travel costs $ 652.20 3. Copy Costs $ 2.55 4. Telephone Charges $ - 0-5. Translation Services Fees $ - 0 - TOTAL COSTS $5,503.67 Dated this day of, 2009. ROBERT A. ROSENBERG, Referee CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I HEREBY CERTIFY that the original of the foregoing Report of Referee has been mailed to THE HONORABLE THOMAS D. HALL, Clerk, Supreme Court of Florida, 500 South Duval Street, Tallahassee, Florida 32399-1927, and that copies were mailed by regular U.S. mail to the following: STAFF COUNSEL, The Florida Bar, 651 East Jefferson Street, Tallahassee, Florida 32399-2300; and LORRAINE CHRISTINE HOFFMANN, Bar Counsel, The Florida Bar, Lake Shore Plaza II, 1300 Concord Terrace, Suite 130, Sunrise, Florida 33323; and DAID ROTH, Counsel for Respondent, 515 North Flagler Drive, Suite 325, West Palm Beach, Florida 33401 on this day of, 2009. G:akline\LCH\RR\cone rr disbar.doc ROBERT A. ROSENBERG, REFEREE 25