referee bar in Florida

2001We agree with the referee's conclusion that Cosnow is guilty of violating rules 4-1.1 and 4-1.7(a). [1] In Florida Bar v. Daniel, 626 So.2d 178, 182 (Fla.1993), we held that a referee has the authority in a bar disciplinary proceeding to enter a summary judgment order: Under Rule Regulating The Florida Bar 3-7 .6(e)(1), once a formal complaint has been filed and forwarded to a referee for hearing, the Florida Rules of Civil Procedure apply except where otherwise provided in the rule.

2000In Florida Bar v. Daniel, 626 So.2d 178, 182 (Fla.1993), a bar disciplinary proceeding, this Court held: Under Rule Regulating The Florida Bar 3-7 .6(e)(1), once a formal complaint has been filed and forwarded to a referee for hearing, the Florida Rules of Civil Procedure apply except where otherwise provided in the rule.

1999More importantly, although the use of this evidence in this manner is somewhat analogous to the use of similar fact evidence to prove guilt in a criminal context, the referee in bar discipline proceedings is not bound by the technical rules of evidence and is "authorized to consider any evidence ... deem[ed] relevant in resolving the factual question." Florida Bar v. Rood, 620 So.2d 1252, 1255 (Fla. 1993); see also Florida Bar v. Vining, 707 So.2d 670, 673 (Fla. 1998).

1995See Florida Bar v. Rood, 620 So.2d 1252, 1255 (Fla. 1993). [4] Section 92.50(3), Florida Statutes (1993), provides: Oaths, affidavits, and acknowledgments, required or authorized by the laws of this state, may be taken or administered in any foreign country, by or before any judge or justice of a court of last resort, any notary public of such foreign country, any minister, consul general, charge d'affaires, or consul of the United States resident in such country.

2014This Court has explained that it generally defers to the discipline recommended by the referee in bar discipline cases because “[t]he referee, as finder of fact in Bar disciplinary proceedings, is in a unique position to assess the credibility of witnesses and appraise the circumstances surrounding alleged violations,” and that the referee “occupies a favored vantage point for assessing key considerations — such as a respondent’s degree of culpability and his or her cooperation, forthrightness, remorse, and rehabilitation (or potential for rehabilitation).” Fla. Bar v. Lecznar, 690 So.2d 1284,

2014This Court has explained that it generally defers to the - 21 - discipline recommended by the referee in bar discipline cases because “[t]he referee, as finder of fact in Bar disciplinary proceedings, is in a unique position to assess the credibility of witnesses and appraise the circumstances surrounding alleged violations,” and that the referee “occupies a favored vantage point for assessing key considerations—such as a respondent’s degree of culpability and his or her cooperation, forthrightness, remorse, and rehabilitation (or potential for rehabilitation).” Fla. Bar v. Lecznar, 690 So. 2d

2012The Court has clearly held that a referee in a bar disciplinary proceeding can properly rely upon facts established in orders and decisions of other tribunals to support his or her findings of fact. 3 In Florida Bar v. Tobkin, 944 So.2d 219, 223 (Fla.2006), the respondent challenged the referee’s finding of fact as to several counts on the basis that the findings were based on the “hearsay language included in the ‘unauthenticated’ opinion of the Fourth District in Rose v. Fiedler, 855 So.2d 122 (Fla. 4th DCA 2003) [iquashed sub nom.

2011Because the determination of whether an employee voluntarily terminated her employment or was discharged is a factual determination to be made by the referee or hearing officer, see Gulfview Animal Hosp. v. Zemke, 741 So.2d 1163, 1164 (Fla. 2d DCA 1999); credibility of the witnesses, lies within the sole discretion of the fact finder, see Glover v. Sanford Child Care, Inc., 429 So.2d 91, 92 (Fla. 5th DCA 1983); and this Court may only reverse if the findings are not supported by competent, substantial evidence, see Aldana-Chiles v. Fla. Unemployment Appeals Comm’n, 930 So.2d 808, 810 (Fla. 3d

2011Because the determination of whether an employee voluntarily terminated her employment or was discharged is a factual determination to be made by the referee or hearing officer, see Gulfview Animal Hosp. v. Zemke, 741 So.2d 1163, 1164 (Fla. 2d DCA 1999); credibility of the witnesses, lies within the sole discretion of the fact finder, see Glover v. Sanford Child Care, Inc., 429 So.2d 91, 92 (Fla. 5th DCA 1983); and this Court may only reverse if the findings are not supported by competent, substantial evidence, see Aldana-Chiles v. Fla. Unemployment Appeals Comm’n, 930 So.2d 808, 810 (Fla. 3d

2011Because the determination of whether an employee voluntarily terminated her employment or was discharged is a factual determination to be made by the referee or hearing officer, see Gulfview Animal Hosp. v. Zemke, 741 So.2d 1163, 1164 (Fla. 2d DCA 1999); credibility of the witnesses, lies within the sole discretion of the fact finder, see Glover v. Sanford Child Care, Inc., 429 So.2d 91, 92 (Fla. 5th DCA 1983); and this Court may only reverse if the findings are not supported by competent, substantial evidence, see Aldana-Chiles v. Fla. Unemployment Appeals Comm’n, 930 So.2d 808, 810 (Fla. 3d

2000See 646 So.2d at 189-90 .

1999More importantly, although the use of this evidence in this manner is somewhat analogous to the use of similar fact evidence to prove guilt in a criminal context, the referee in bar discipline proceedings is not bound by the technical rules of evidence and is "authorized to consider any evidence ... deem[ed] relevant in resolving the factual question." Florida Bar v. Rood, 620 So.2d 1252, 1255 (Fla. 1993); see also Florida Bar v. Vining, 707 So.2d 670, 673 (Fla. 1998).

1998Florida Bar v. Boland, 702 So.2d 229, 231-32 (Fla.1997).

1998See Florida Bar v. Clement, 662 So.2d 690 , 697 n. 3 (Fla.1995) (reaffirming Rood in concluding "a referee in a bar-discipline case can consider any evidence he or she deems relevant to resolving a factual question") (citation omitted). [11] The referee was present for the testimony and able to observe the witnesses' demeanor and assess their credibility.