TALLAHASSEE (Florida Record) — Tampa attorney Thomas Klemens Almquist faces suspension following an April 18 Florida Supreme Court order regarding allegations arising from two cases, according to a recent announcement by The Florida Bar.
"In two cases, Almquist accepted fees from clients but did little to no work," the state bar said in its April 30 announcement of the discipline and the Supreme Court's order. "He failed to respond to the clients' and The Florida Bar's repeated inquiries."
In its two-page order, the state high court approved the uncontested referee's report accepting the consent judgment reached in the matter before suspending Almquist for 91 days and ordered him to pay nearly $1,472 in costs.
Almquist's suspension will be effective 30 days from the date of the court's order to allow him time to close his practice and protect his existing clients' interests, according to the court's order.
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 Almquist's suspension.
Almquist was admitted to the bar in Florida on April 16, 2010, according to his profile at the state bar website. No prior discipline before the state bar is listed on Almquist's state bar profile.
Allegations against Almquist stem from his representation of two clients, according to the consent judgment filed with the court. The judgment also includes Almquist's conditional guilty plea.
One client hired Almquist in June 2013 to represent her in a divorce and to file a writ of replevin while the other client hired Almquist the following month to file a notice of appeal on his behalf.
The first client complained to the state bar in October 2013 that Almquist ignored her for weeks but eventually responded to say "he was having personal problems at the moment." In May 2014, Almquist said in a letter to the grievance committee that he did no work for the client "because she had not signed a new fee agreement when her focus changed from divorce to bankruptcy," the consent judgment said.
The other client tried to communicate with Almquist, asking for copies of a brief and other filings "to no avail," the consent judgment said. His appeal was ultimately denied, according to the consent judgment.