Supreme Court of Florida
731 So. 2d 1237 (1999)
In 1992, Mr. Dunagan (defendant), an attorney, represented William and Paula Leucht in the acquisition of a restaurant business. In registering the name of the business, Mr. Dunagan mistakenly omitted Mrs. Leucht’s name as an owner. In later dealings involving the business, Mr. Dunagan represented that Mr. Leucht was the sole owner of the business. In 1996, Mr. Dunagan sent a letter to the Port Orange Police Department whose jurisdiction included one of the Leuchts’ restaurants. The letter stated that Mr. Leucht was the sole owner of the restaurant and that he intended to terminate two employees and to prevent them from returning to the premises. The letter indicated that the police might be called upon if anything got out of hand. Several days later, Mr. Dunagan filed a divorce petition on behalf of Mr. Leucht. Mr. Dunagan did not seek Mrs. Leucht’s consent to represent her husband. A few days later, Mrs. Leucht was told by a restaurant employee that Mr. Leucht was the business’s sole owner and that Mrs. Leucht was not to enter the premises. She went to the restaurant nevertheless and was forcibly removed by the police and arrested for disorderly conduct. She insisted to the police that she was a co-owner of the business. The trial judge overseeing the Leuchts’ divorce ordered that the restaurant business be distributed equally between the couple. Mrs. Leucht filed a malpractice suit against Mr. Dunagan. The Florida Bar (plaintiff) brought a disciplinary action against him. After a hearing, the referee issued findings and recommended a 90-day suspension. Mr. Dunagan appealed.
Rule of Law
Holding and Reasoning (<i>Per Curiam</i>)
What to do next…
Unlock this case brief with a free (no-commitment) trial membership of Quimbee.
You’ll be in good company: Quimbee is one of the most widely used and trusted sites for law students, serving more than 97,000 law students since 2011. Some law schools—such as Yale, Vanderbilt, Berkeley, and the University of Illinois—even subscribe directly to Quimbee for all their law students. Read our student testimonials.
Learn more about Quimbee’s unique (and proven) approach to achieving great grades at law school.
Quimbee is a company hell-bent on one thing: helping you get an “A” in every course you take in law school, so you can graduate at the top of your class and get a high-paying law job. We’re not just a study aid for law students; we’re the study aid for law students. Read more about Quimbee.
Here's why 236,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
- Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 14,200 briefs, keyed to 189 casebooks. Top-notch customer support.
- The right amount of information, includes the facts, issues, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents.
- Access in your classes, works on your mobile and tablet. Massive library of related video lessons and high quality multiple-choice questions.
- Easy to use, uniform format for every case brief. Written in plain English, not in legalese. Our briefs summarize and simplify; they don’t just repeat the court’s language.