Opinion
CASE NO.: SC14-463
01-07-2015
FLORIDA BOARD OF BAR EXAMINERS RE: JAMES WELDON AARON
Upon consideration of James Weldon Aaron's petition for review filed in the above cause, it is ordered that the Public Findings of Fact, Conclusions of Law, and Recommendation of the Florida Board of Bar Examiners is approved. James Weldon Aaron's petition is hereby denied and he shall not be admitted to The Florida Bar at this time. Aaron shall be disqualified from reapplying for admission for a period of two years from January 15, 2014, the date of the Board's findings. LABARGA, C.J., and PARIENTE, LEWIS, CANADY, and POLSTON, JJ., concur. PERRY, J., dissents with an opinion in which QUINCE, J., concurs. PERRY, J., dissenting.
I respectfully dissent to this Court's order denying James Weldon Aaron's petition for readmission. After considering Aaron's evidence as to each of the elements of rehabilitation discussed herein, this Court has determined that Aaron has failed to demonstrate rehabilitation and approves the Florida Board of Bar Examiners' (Board) recommendation that his readmission be denied. I dissent because in my view, Aaron has demonstrated all that should be required of him.
Following his disbarment in 1992, Aaron first filed an application for readmission to The Florida Bar in 2006. He successfully completed all portions of the Florida Bar Examination. In investigating his application, the Board identified information that reflected adversely on Aaron's character and fitness, and it filed with this Court six specifications. After conducting a formal hearing, the Board found that Aaron's disciplinary history, as well as two instances of professional misconduct after he was disbarred (where Aaron appeared at a mediation hearing with another person in order to represent that person, and prepared warranty deeds for several individuals), constituted disqualifying factors regarding his petition for readmission to the Bar. The Board also found that Aaron failed to establish his rehabilitation from such conduct by clear and convincing evidence. We approved the Board's findings and accepted its recommendation by denying Aaron's petition for readmission.
In December 2011, Aaron filed an updated application for readmission to the Bar. Because his previous Bar examination scores expired in March 2012, he was required to obtain "new passing scores," which he did and again successfully completed the Bar Examination in April 2013. The Board determined that no additional Specifications should be filed regarding Aaron's application for readmission, and thus it immediately held a formal hearing. Following the hearing, the Board concluded that Aaron again failed to demonstrate rehabilitation from his disqualifying conduct, and recommended that his application for readmission be denied. The majority again approves the Board's findings and recommendation. I profoundly disagree. In denying this applicant's petition, I believe the majority is creating a threshold to readmission that is wholly unreasonable and virtually unattainable. If this Court intended to permanently disbar Aaron, it should have said so initially in 1992.
Aaron provided evidence that in the years since his disbarment he has engaged in numerous acts of commendable community service. For example, he has: (1) volunteered to transport neighborhood children to and from Sunday school classes; (2) served as a trustee for his church; (3) spearheaded a community arts and crafts festival; (4) volunteered as a basketball coach for the YMCA; and (5) spent one year as a volunteer for the Children's Home Society. Additionally, Aaron fully acknowledged to the Board his wrongdoing and takes sole responsibility for his actions. Aaron testified that he has made full restitution to George Arvanitis, the victim of his misconduct. Aaron testified that Arvanitis was the co-personal representative for (as well as a beneficiary of) the estate from which Aaron misappropriated funds. Previously, Arvanitis had arranged to absorb the entire loss so that none of the other beneficiaries would be harmed. Aaron also testified that he: (1) started and sustained mentoring young men in the community; (2) assisted in planning a centennial celebration for the City of Sebring; and (3) started and sustained acting as a volunteer counselor with the "Serving the Health Insurance Needs of Elders (SHINE)" program, for the Florida Department of Elder Affairs, which provides free counseling and assistance to senior citizens regarding their health insurance. Finally, Aaron presented five character witnesses—each testified that he or she believes Aaron is currently a person of good moral character.
While I recognize there is a heavy burden on a disbarred attorney to demonstrate rehabilitation, see Fla. Bd. of Bar Exam'rs re J.J.T., 761 So. 2d 1094 (Fla. 2000), I disagree with the majority that Aaron has not carried such a burden by way of his present petition.
Aaron was disbarred for misappropriating approximately $54,000 from the estate for which George Arvanitis, was the co-personal representative and beneficiary. Notably, this Court's opinion disbarring Aaron did not expressly order him to make restitution to Arvantis or the estate that he represented. Nonetheless, in 1991, Aaron and Arvanitis (who was also an attorney, practicing in California), executed a promissory note for $54,000. By the time of Aaron's formal hearing before the Board in September 2009, Arvanitis had passed away; however, Aaron has entered into evidence Arvanitis' sworn testimony before the State Bar of California, given in April 2004 during Aaron's readmission proceeding in California. Arvanitis testified there that Aaron paid him $1,100 toward the promissory note in February or March 2004. He also testified that, before his disbarment, Aaron represented Arvanitis' son, who was involved in several criminal cases in Florida, without charge. Then in September 2005, Aaron paid Arvanitis a lump sum of $10,000. Arvanitis testified that he considered the promissory note debt satisfied; notably, he returned the promissory note to Aaron marked "paid in full."
In Florida Board of Bar Examiners re Marks, 959 So. 2d 228 (Fla. 2007), this Court stated: "The essence of true rehabilitation is to first atone for the harm caused by the past misconduct. The victims of that misconduct must be made whole to the extent humanly possible." Id. Aaron has met that obligation here. Accordingly, I would approve Aaron's application for readmission. QUINCE, J., concurs. A True Copy
Test:
/s/_________
John A. Tomasino
Clerk, Supreme Court
sh
Served:
DARYL M. MANNING
ROBERT G. BLYTHE
RICHARD ADAM GREENBERG
MICHELE A. GAVAGNI