IN THE SUPREME COURT OF FLORIDA

(Before a Referee)

THE FLORIDA BAR, Supreme Court Case

No. SC07-1961
Complainant,
v.

CAROL COBOURN ASBURY, The Florida Bar File

No. 2006-50,664(15C)
Respondent.

CONDITIONAL GUILTY PLEA FOR CONSENT JUDGMENT

Carol Cobourn Asbury, respondent, hereby tenders her guilty plea for

consent judgment, pursuant to R. Regulating Fla. Bar 3-7.9(b), .and states as

follows:

1. Respondent is, and at all times material to this action was, a member

of The Florida Bar and subject to the jurisdiction and disciplinary rules of the

Supreme Court of Florida.

2. Having stated a desire to plead guilty to The Florida Bar's charges and

enter into a consent judgment, respondent has been advised by bar counsel that The

Florida Bar will recommend that respondent receive a public reprimand (via

appearance before The Florida Bar's Board of Governors) and be ordered to pay

The Florida Bar's costs in this matter.

.
CCA
ft 1 -V PT
 3. Predicated upon the bar recommending discipline in the form of a

public reprimand and payment of The Florida Bar's costs in this matter, respondent

concurs with the following narrative and pleads guilty to the following:

COUNTI

A. On or about July 1, 2005, Joseph Polifroni contracted to sell a

certain parcel of real property to David Miller.

B. The sales contract required the buyer (Miller) to pay a $ 100,000

deposit, to be held in escrow by a third-party fiduciary (the escrow agent).

C. Polifroni and Miller agreed that respondent would serve as their

escrow agent.

D. Miller never paid the required deposit to respondent.

E. Nevertheless, on or about July 15, 2005, Victoria Campbell, an

employee in respondent's law office, prepared and mailed an escrow letter to

Polifroni (the seller).

F. In this letter, Campbell falsely or erroneously advised Polifroni

that respondent's law firm, Asbury & Associates, had received and

negotiated the $100,000 deposit from Miller.

G. Ultimately, the real property transaction did not close.

H. From August 18 through September 6, 2005, Polifroni's

attorney, Steven Schorr, placed several calls to respondent's law office, in

order to claim the escrow deposit for his client.

_ 2
CCA PT
 I. During this time period, respondent was out of the office

frequently, dealing with a serious medical crisis in her family.

J. Respondent did not learn of Schorr's telephone calls to her until

September 6, 2005.

K. On or about August 31, 2005, Schorr sent a written demand

letter to respondent, requesting the release of the $100,000 deposit to his

client.

L. On September 6, 2005, Schorr reached respondent by telephone

and demanded that she release Polifroni's deposit.

M. During that September 6, 2005 telephone conversation,

respondent told Schorr that she had no knowledge of the real property

transaction or its parties. Respondent also told Schorr that she never

received, deposited or held Miller's "deposit" (despite Campbell's July 15,

2005 letter to the contrary), and that she was wholly unaware of the entire

transaction.

N. Respondent admitted to Schorr that she had never seen the

escrow letter that Campbell created and mailed to Polifroni and that she did

not authorize Campbell to create it, publish it, or distribute it.

O. Although respondent terminated Campbell's employment

immediately, upon learning of the false escrow letter, respondent made no

CCA PT
 investigation into the matter, and did not report Campbell's conduct to law

enforcement authorities.

P. By failing to supervise her employee, Victoria Campbell,

respondent permitted her law office to unwittingly participate in a material

misrepresentation to Polifroni, and was, therefore, responsible for such

conduct.

Q. By failing to report Campbell's conduct to law enforcement

authorities, respondent failed to take reasonable remedial action.

COUNT II

R. On or about November 9, 2006, The Florida Bar directed an

official investigative inquiry to respondent, at her record bar address,

requesting bank records for respondent's escrow account.

S. Pursuant to R. Regulating Fla. Bar 4-8.4(g)(l), respondent was

obligated to respond to The Florida Bar's investigative inquiry within 15

days.

T. Notwithstanding the foregoing, respondent failed and refused to

respond to The Florida Bar's first investigative inquiry, at all.

U. On February 2, 2007, The Florida Bar directed a second

investigative inquiry to respondent, at her record bar address.

V. Respondent failed and refused to timely respond to The Florida

Bar's second investigative inquiry.

4
'CfcA PT
 W. As a result of respondent's failure to respond to The Florida

Bar's investigative inquiries, Fifteenth Judicial Circuit Grievance Committee

"C" issued and served a Subpoena Duces Tecum upon respondent on

February 6, 2007. This subpoena duces tecum commanded respondent to

appear before the grievance committee's investigating member and produce

specific documents.

X. Notwithstanding the grievance committee subpoena which was

served upon her, respondent failed to appear and failed to produce the

records compelled by the grievance committee.

4. By the conduct set forth above, respondent admits that she violated R.

Regulating Fla. 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 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.]; 4-5.3(b) [With respect to a nonlawyer employed or retained by or

associated with a lawyer ... (2) a lawyer having direct supervisory authority over

the nonlawyer shall make reasonable efforts to ensure that the person's conduct is

compatible with the professional obligations of the lawyer.]; 4-5.3(b)(3) [With

t to a nonlawyer employed or retained by or associated with a lawyer ... (3)

5
'CCA^ 7
pf
a lawyer shall be responsible for the conduct of such a person that would be a

violation of the Rules of Professional Conduct if engaged in by a lawyer if the

lawyer orders or, with the knowledge of the specific conduct, ratifies the conduct

involved; or the lawyer is a partner in the law firm in which the person is employed

or has direct supervisory authority over the person, and knows of the conduct at a

time when its consequences can be avoided or mitigated but fails to take

reasonable remedial action.]; 4-5.3(c) [Although paralegals or legal assistants may

perform the duties delegated to them by the lawyer without the presence or active

involvement of the lawyer, the lawyer shall review and be responsible for the work

product of the paralegals or legal assistants.]; 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.];

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 ...]; 4-8.4(g)(l) [A lawyer

shall not fail to respond, in writing, to any official inquiry by bar counsel or a

disciplinary agency, as defined elsewhere in these rules, when bar counsel or the

agency is conducting an investigation into the lawyer's conduct. A written response

shall be made: (1) within 15 days of the date of the initial written investigative

inquiry by bar counsel, grievance committee, or board of governors]; and

4-8.4(g)(2) [A lawyer shall not fail to respond, in writing, to any official inquiry by
rt& 6 /7-
CCA PT
bar counsel or a disciplinary agency, as defined elsewhere in these rules, when bar

counsel or the agency is conducting an investigation into the lawyer's conduct. A

written response shall be made within 10 days of the date of any follow-up written

investigative inquires by bar counsel, grievance committee, or board of

governors.].

5. Respondent tenders this consent judgment with full knowledge of all

rights afforded to respondents in disciplinary proceedings by the Rules Regulating

The Florida Bar including, but not limited to, the right to an evidentiary hearing

before the referee (during which The Florida Bar would have the burden of proving

its case by clear and convincing evidence).

6. In mitigation of her actions, respondent asserts the following:

A. Respondent expressly confirms that neither she nor her law firm

received any funds from any party relating to the real property transaction

that gave rise to the instant bar complaint.

B. Respondent further confirms that she had no knowledge of the

escrow letter drafted and published by her employee, Victoria Campbell.

C. During all times material to this complaint, respondent was

dealing with a severe medical crisis in her family and therefore was not in

her office when the acts of Victoria Campbell took place.

D. Respondent has been a member of The Florida Bar since

May 24, 1984 and has not been previously disciplined.

l i
CCA PT
 E. Respondent is remorseful for her conduct in this matter and

regrets any inconvenience her misconduct caused any party.

7. Respondent has been afforded an opportunity to be represented by

legal counsel of her choosing and expressly states that she is well satisfied with her

legal counsel, whose signature is affixed to this plea.

8. Respondent agrees to pay all costs reasonably incurred by The Florida

Bar in the investigation of the aforesaid matter within 30 days of the entry of the

Supreme Court's final order, with statutory interest to accrue on all costs not paid

within said time, unless time for payment is extended by the Board of Governors.

9. Respondent understands that The Florida Bar's agreement with this

consent judgment is conditioned upon approval by The Florida Bar Board of

Governors' designated reviewer, the referee, and the Supreme Court of Florida. If

rejected, respondent understands that her consent judgment shall be of no force and

effect and the matter will be referred to a referee for hearing on the merits.

10. Respondent certifies that she is not acting under duress, that she is not

presently under the influence of any substance, and that she is not laboring under

any physical or mental infirmity which would preclude her from knowingly and

intelligently executing and submitting this guilty plea and consent judgment.

11. Respondent acknowledges that this consent judgment is tendered

knowingly and voluntarily without fear, threat, coercion or promises not set forth

in/tjftis agreement.
8
CCA " PT
 12. Respondent acknowledges that should the conditions set forth herein

be met, this consent to disciplirie shall not be subject to modification or withdrawal

in any subsequent proceeding.

Respectfully submitted,

Date:
C/ROL'C^BOURN , #393665
Respondent //
Asbury & Associate£/P.A.
248 North Congress Avenue
Boynton Beach, Florida 33426
(561)424-0195

Date:
PETER TICKTIN, #887935
The Ticktin Law Group, P.A.
Counsel for Respondent
3700 Coconut Creek Parkway, Suite 160
Coconut Creek, Florida 33066
(954) 978-8950

Date:
LORRAINE CHRJWTINE HOFFI I, #612669
Bar Counsel, The Florida Bar
5900 N. Andrews Avenue, Suite 900
Fort Lauderdale, Florida 33309
954-772-2245

J:\users\DMACHA\CONSENT\asbury CJ.doc