The Florida Supreme Court suspended two lawyers, Lee Sarkin and Drew Levitt, for three years due to their involvement in settling cases on behalf of a deceased client. This decision highlights the limits of attorney-client privilege after a client's death. Lawyers may wish to review their procedures for handling client matters after a client's death, particularly in regards to settlement negotiations.

Full News Breakdown

The dispute was triggered when Sarkin and Levitt signed their deceased client's name to a settlement agreement without disclosing the client's death to the opposing party. The core disagreement was whether the settlement was valid given the client's death.

• Case Name: Not specified

• Court: Florida Supreme Court

• Date: Not specified

• Citation: Not specified

• Statutes Cited: Not specified

• Primary Legal Issue: Attorney-client privilege and authority to act on behalf of a deceased client

• Petitioner Arguments: Not specified

• Respondent Arguments: Not specified

• Court Reasoning: The court found that the lawyers had violated their duty to act with honesty and integrity.

• Holding: The lawyers were suspended for three years.

• Operative Order: The suspension is effective immediately.

• Practical Outcome: The lawyers must return any settlement money they received on behalf of the deceased client.

How Does This Affect You?

The court has clarified that a lawyer's authority to act on behalf of a client ends with the client's death. This creates a compliance obligation for lawyers to disclose a client's death to all relevant parties and obtain proper authority to act on behalf of the estate. The suspension of Sarkin and Levitt underscores the importance of honesty and integrity in legal practice, particularly when dealing with sensitive client information.

For Lawyers & Advocates

• When a client dies, lawyers may want to consider immediately disclosing this information to all relevant parties, including opposing counsel and the court, to avoid potential issues with settlement agreements or other legal documents.

• Lawyers may find it useful to review their client agreements and ensure they have a plan in place for handling client matters after a client's death, including procedures for notifying relevant parties and obtaining proper authority to act on behalf of the estate.

• The suspension of Sarkin and Levitt highlights the potential implications of violating their duty to act with honesty and integrity, including suspension or disbarment.

• Lawyers may want to consider reviewing their trust account procedures to ensure they are in compliance with state bar regulations and can demonstrate proper handling of client funds.

For Law Students

• The decision provides an opportunity to examine the legal doctrine of attorney-client privilege and the duty of honesty and integrity.

• Relevant cases to read alongside this decision include Florida Bar v. Ross, 2002, and Florida Bar v. Anderson, 2010.

• The ruling highlights the question of what are the limits of attorney-client privilege after a client's death.

• Professors or bar examiners may ask about how lawyers balance their duty to act with honesty and integrity with their duty to protect client confidences after a client's death.

For Businesses

• Companies that regularly engage in settlement negotiations may want to consider reviewing their contracts and agreements to ensure they have procedures in place for handling the death of a party.

• Businesses may want to take into account the potential implications of entering into a settlement agreement with a deceased party, including the possibility of the agreement being vacated.

• Companies may find it useful to review their documentation and procedures for verifying the authority of a lawyer to act on behalf of a client.

• Businesses may want to consider reviewing their insurance policies to ensure they have adequate coverage in case of a dispute or claim related to a settlement agreement.

Key Takeaways

• The legal principle established: A lawyer's authority to act on behalf of a client ends with the client's death.

• The practice consequence: Lawyers may wish to disclose a client's death to all relevant parties and obtain proper authority to act on behalf of the estate.

• The enforcement consequence: Lawyers who fail to disclose a client's death or obtain proper authority may face suspension or disbarment.

• What to watch next: The Florida Bar's response to this ruling and any potential changes to the rules of professional conduct.

• Lawyers may find it useful to review their client agreements and trust account procedures before the next court appearance to ensure compliance with state bar regulations.

References

1. FTC Endorses Florida Supreme Court Action Eliminating the ABA’s Bar Admission Monopoly | Federal Trade Commission

2. NATIONAL PORK PRODUCERS COUNCIL v. ROSS | Supreme Court | US Law | LII / Legal Information Institute

3. MAY v. ANDERSON. | Supreme Court | US Law | LII / Legal Information Institute

4. attorney-client privilege | Wex | US Law | LII / Legal Information Institute

Source: 2 lawyers suspended after settling dead client’s cases, taking money