• Embed Doc
  • Copy Link
  • Readcast
  • Collections
  • 2
    CommentGo Back
Download
 
INTHE SUPREME COURT OF FLORIDA
THE
FLORIDA
BAR,
ComplainantCase No.: SC05-1149
L.T.
Case No.: 2004-10,132(6A)
v.
MARK
A.
ADAMS,Respondent.
1
RESPONSE TO THE FLORIDA BAR'SPETITION FOR INTERTM SUSPENSION
COMES NOW, the Respondent,
MARK
A. ADAMS, pursuant to thisCourt's Order dated March 9,2006, and files his Response to the Florida Bar'sPetition for Interim Suspension showing that the Florida Bar's Petition for InterimSuspension should be denied because there is no legal basis for an interimsuspension, because the Florida Bar's Petition does not even meet the miniinurnrequirements for a petition for an emergency suspension, and because an interimsuspension would violate the procedures established for due process in disciplinaryproceedings before this
Court.
INTERIM SUSPENSION
The Florida Bar's Petition does not cite
any
rule or case as a legal basis foran interim suspension, but
it
does acknowledge that Rule 3-5.2 governsproceedings for emergency suspension. This failure is not surprising as the Rules
 
Regulating the Florida Bar do not provide for an interim suspension. Please seeand take judicial notice of the results of the Westlaw search for the tenns "RulesRegulating the Florida
Bar"
nd '"nterim suspension" in Appendix A.Furthermore, only two cases discuss the interim suspension of an attorney,
The Florida Bar
v.
Forrester,
916 So.2d 647 (Fla. 2005) and
TheFlorida Bar
v.
Prior,
330
So.2d 697 (Fla. 1976). Please see and take judicial notice of the resultsof the Westlaw search for the terms "interim suspension" and "attorney" inAppendix B.
Prior
concerns the automatic suspension of
an
attorney convicted ofmultiple felonies. On November 6, 1974, the Florida Bar filed a petition tosuspend
Mr.
Prior for conviction of multiple felonies, and
Mr.
Prior filed a timelyresponse to the Bar's petition.
Prior
at 697-698. As a result, this Court followedthe rule which applied at that time to attorneys who were convicted of a crime, andit deferred the suspension until the parties could present their briefs to this Court.
Id.
After complying with the procedure for due process provided in theappropriate rule and considering the parties' briefs, this Court decided to suspend
Mr.
Prior on March
3
1,
1976.
Id.
Prior
is clearly distinguishable frsm the instantcase as the Respondent herein has not been charged with or convicted of anyfelony.
 
011
August
8,
2002, the Florida Bar filed a petition for
an
order to showcause why Ms. Forrester should not be held in contempt and to suspend Ms.Forrester who it alleged had been practicing law while suspended.
Forrester
at
649.
The Florida Bar's petition in
Forrester
is not available online, but a review ofthe respondent's briefs indicate that an affidavit was attached to the Florida Bar'spetition as required by Rule 3-5.2 which governs proceedings for emergencysuspension. Furthermore, it appears that the Florida Bar inadvertently used theterm interim rather than emergency in its petition for Ms. Forrester's suspension asthe term is only found in this Court's opinion
in
Forrester
in connection with thetitle of the Bar's petition, and therefore,
Forrester
does not provide any legal basisfor an interim suspension or for the Florida Bar's Petition for Interim Suspensionof the Respondent.
EMERGENCY
SUSPENSION
Rule 3-5.2 governs proceedings for emergency suspension and probation.Rule 3-5.2(a) states, "On petition of The Florida Bar, authorized by its president,president-elect, or executive director, supported by
1
or more affidavitsdemonstrating facts personally known to the affiants that, if unrebutted, wouldestablish clearly and convincingly that an attorney appears to be causing greatpublic harm, the Supreme Court of Florida may issue an order imposingemergency conditions of probation on said attorney or suspending said attorney on
of 00

Leave a Comment

You must be to leave a comment.
Submit
Characters: ...
markadamsjdmba

I was prosecuted to cover up election fraud and judicial corruption in Florida. For more on that, see “Justice” in Florida’s Supreme Court!?! at http://blip.tv/file/1339250 and don’t miss the links below the video. I was also criminally prosecuted without any legal basis. See my Answer Brief

reply08 / 05 / 2010
markadamsjdmba

U.S. Supreme Court Justices Douglas and Black predicted that mandatory Bar associations would be used to control lawyers, prohibit challenges to the establishment, and cover up misconduct by powerful interests. It sure looks like their predictions were accurate. See their dissents in Lathrop v. Donohue, 367 U.S. 820 (1961) at http://supreme.justia.com/us/367/820/... beginning at 866.

01 / 22 / 2011
Judicial_Fraud

JUDICIAL CRIME IN FLORIDA IS ORGANIZED.

08 / 05 / 2010
markadamsjdmba

Naturally, the connected attorneys and those who do their bidding get away with their crimes. For examples, see the FDLE's Letter to the Florida Bar and my Letter to the Inspector General for the Florida Attorney General's Office

08 / 05 / 2010
markadamsjdmba

If you want to know how the Florida Bar regulators can ignore the law to do favors for self-proclaimed connected attorneys and to cover up case fixing and election fraud, see Why Does the Government Ignore Our Wishes? at http://dailycensored.com/2009/09/11/w... and don’t miss my short speech.

reply08 / 05 / 2010
markadamsjdmba

If you take a look, you’ll learn why those in power and those who can improperly influence them get away with violating our rights, abusing their power, and committing horrible crimes. My article on torture includes a link to the U.S. Supreme Court case which explains how one of our stolen rights makes the difference between justice and injustice, between freedom and slavery.

08 / 05 / 2010
You must be to leave a comment.
Submit
Characters: ...