THE FLORIDA BAR v. CARR, 574 So.2d 59 (Fla. 1990)

THE FLORIDA BAR, COMPLAINANT, v. PAUL S. CARR, RESPONDENT.

Nos. 72576, 72707.Supreme Court of Florida.
February 1, 1990.

John F. Harkness, Jr., Executive Director and John T. Berry, Staff Counsel, Tallahassee, and Richard A. Greenberg, Asst. Staff Counsel, Tampa, for complainant.

Paul S. Carr, of Carr Carr, Ruskin, in pro. per.

CORRECTED OPINION
PER CURIAM.

These disciplinary proceedings against respondent are before the Court on the complaint of The Florida Bar and the findings and recommendations contained in the referee’s report. We have jurisdiction pursuant to article V, section 15, of the Florida Constitution. Respondent petitions for review of the referee’s recommendation that each party be responsible for its own costs.

The referee found a failure to prove the charges filed against respondent by clear and convincing evidence, and found respondent not guilty. Neither The Florida Bar nor respondent seeks review of the referee’s findings of fact, and we approve those findings. The only issue on appeal is whether the referee abused his discretion in recommending that each party bear its own costs. Respondent argues that because The Florida Bar is customarily awarded costs in cases where a lawyer is disciplined, it follows that a lawyer who prevails against charges brought by the Bar should be awarded costs as a matter of right. We disagree. The taxation of costs is a matter within the discretion of the referee, and should not be reversed absent an abuse of discretion. Clearly there is no abuse in this instance where respondent failed to ask for costs before the referee. Indeed, he submitted a proposed report in which he suggested to the referee the following language, “I find that each party shall bear their own costs incurred herein,” which language was adopted verbatim by the referee. Respondent received exactly what he proposed to the referee.

Accordingly, we approve the referee’s recommendations, find respondent not guilty of the charges filed against him, and hold each party responsible for its costs.

It is so ordered.

EHRLICH, C.J., and OVERTON, McDONALD, SHAW, BARKETT, GRIMES and KOGAN, JJ., concur.

Page 60

jdjungle

Share
Published by
jdjungle
Tags: 574 So.2d 59

Recent Posts

Florida Attorney General Opinion No. AGO 2025-03 (Oct. 20, 2025)

State Attorney Staff Firearm Possession in Courtrooms Number: AGO 2025-03 Issued: October 20, 2025 Ed…

1 month ago

Florida Attorney General Opinion No. AGO 2025-02 (Oct. 20, 2025)

Certain Professional Firearm Regulations after McDaniels Number: AGO 2025-02 Issued: October 20, 2025 The Honorable…

1 month ago

Florida Attorney General Opinion No. AGO2025-01 (June 11, 2025)

Moving the dates of Municipal Elections absent voter approval Number: AGO2025-01 Issued: June 11, 2025…

1 month ago

Florida Attorney General Opinion No. AGO2023-04 (10/30/2023)

Sunshine Law – Search and Selection Committees Number: AGO2023-04 Issued October 30, 2023 Rachel Kamoutsas…

1 year ago

Florida Attorney General Opinion No. AGO2023-03 (10/02/2023)

Firearms - Definitions Number: AGO2023-03 Issued October 02, 2023 Representative Shane Abbott Florida House of…

1 year ago

Florida Attorney General Opinion No. AGO 2023-02 (07/21/2023)

Clerk’s sale of court-ordered debts to debt purchasers Number: AGO 2023-02 Issued July 21, 2023…

1 year ago