Opinion disbarring 'unrepentant' lawyer cites disparaging emails, intentional smirking
Florida lawyer Jeffrey Alan Norkin didn’t get the message after he was suspended in October 2013 and held out as “a glaring example of unprofessional behavior,” according to the Florida Supreme Court.
Norkin has “an unrepentant attitude” and is “not amenable to rehabilitation,” the Florida Supreme Court said in an Oct. 8 opinion (PDF) imposing a permanent disbarment. The Legal Profession Blog has a story.
Norkin was suspended for two years in 2013 and ordered to appear before the Florida Supreme Court for a public reprimand. Norkin had yelled in court and “incessantly” disparaged and humiliated an opposing lawyer, the Florida Supreme Court said in the suspension opinion.
After the suspension, Norkin continued to practice law in a pending case and didn’t file a timely affidavit showing he had notified clients, lawyers and judges of his suspension, the Florida Supreme Court said in its disbarment decision.
In addition, Norkin referred to bar counsel as “evil” and “despicable” in emails, and called the proceedings against him “the most unjust act in judicial history,” the court said, citing a referee’s findings.
The court also noted Norkin’s behavior when he appeared before the Florida Supreme Court for the public reprimand: He “intentionally smirked and stared down each justice one by one.”
Disbarment “is amply supported,” the state supreme court said.
“Given Norkin’s continuation of his egregious behavior following his suspension and during the administration of the public reprimand, we conclude that he will not change his pattern of misconduct,” the court said.
“Indeed, his filings in the instant case continue to demonstrate his disregard for this court, his unrepentant attitude, and his intent to continue his defiant and contemptuous conduct that is demeaning to this court, the court’s processes, and the profession of attorneys as a whole.
“Such misconduct cannot and will not be tolerated as it sullies the dignity of judicial proceedings and debases the constitutional republic we serve. We conclude that Norkin is not amenable to rehabilitation, and as argued by the Bar, is deserving of permanent disbarment.”
In emails to the ABA Journal and another journalist, Norkin calls his first suspension “completely illegal” and says his disbarment “is equally illegal and fraudulent, in that it conceals all of the true and relevant facts from the public.” He also included his court filings, including a petition for rehearing and cert petition seeking to overturn the original suspension.
“In every prosecution, I did NOTHING wrong,” Norkin writes. “If this decision is not vacated I will be filing suit in federal court.”
As for the original suspension, Norkin notes findings by the ethics referee that he acted without dishonest or selfish motive, and argues the ethics case should have been dismissed as a result.
Norkin says the original suspension was based on a bar complaint filed by his opposing counsel in a case that Norkin won.
In that case, Norkin says he was representing a friend, the co-owner of a business, who had been wrongly accused of stealing $1 million from the business. Norkin says the opposing party was ordered to pay a judgment in the case worth $450,000 in today’s dollars, yet the opposing party won attorney fees based on a claim that it was the prevailing party.
Norkin says legal work he performed after the suspension was intended to protect the judgment—thereby protecting the possibility of collecting his attorney fees. Yet the Florida Supreme Court “didn’t mention any of this” in the disbarment decision, he said.
Norkin’s court documents say he has difficulty expressing and reading nonverbal cues as a result of birth defects affecting visual perception, and that those problems have sometimes caused judges to become annoyed with him.
