TALLAHASSEE — Royal Palm Beach attorney Daniel Robert Brinley has been voluntarily disbarred following a Aug. 24 Florida Supreme Court order over multiple allegations of professional misconduct, according to a recent announcement by the Florida Bar.
"Brinley neglected client matters and made misrepresentations to clients concerning the status of their cases," the state bar said in its March 29 announcement of the discipline and the Supreme Court's order. "One of the matters included an allegation of misappropriation."
The state Supreme Court issued its two-page order of disciplinary revocation, tantamount to disbarment, with leave to seek readmission after five years.
Brinley's disbarment was effective 30 days from the date of the court's order to allow time to close his practice and protect his existing clients' interests, according to the state high court's order.
The court also ordered Brinley to pay almost $2,686 in costs.
Florida court orders are not final until time to file a rehearing motion expires. Filing such a motion does not alter the effective date of Brinley's suspension.
Attorneys disbarred in Florida generally cannot reapply for admission for five years and must pass an extensive process that includes a rigorous background check and retaking the bar exam.
Brinley was admitted to the bar in Florida on Sept. 24, 1992, according to his profile at the state bar website. In his amended petition for disciplinary revocation, Brinley said he was suspended for three years in April 1999, was reinstated in September 2007 and has not been disciplined since.
Two matters alleging misconduct that included client neglect, lack of communication, competency and misrepresentation were pending before a referee against Brinley when he filed his petition. Additional matters that included allegations of client neglect, misrepresentation and misappropriation are pending at staff level and before a grievance committee, according to Brinley's petition, in which Brinley is referred to as "petitioner."
"While the petitioner does not believe he engaged in all of the unethical conduct referenced in the various pending matters, he does acknowledge that the allegations, if proven, would form the predicate for disciplinary action by this court," the petition said. "Other than those disclosed above, there are no other past or known pending disciplinary actions or criminal proceedings against the petitioner."