TALLAHASSEE (Florida Record) — Orlando attorney Rasheed Karim Allen has been publicly reprimanded following an Oct. 10 Florida Supreme Court order over allegations in three client matters, according to a recent announcement by The Florida Bar.
"In two cases, Allen did not diligently handle client matters and did not adequately communicate with them regarding their cases," the state bar said in its Oct. 24 announcement of the discipline and the Supreme Court's order. "In another matter, Allen did not clearly communicate with the client regarding the goals of representation."
In its single-page order, the Supreme Court approved the uncontested referee's report filed in the matter before reprimanding Allen and ordered him to pay a little more than $3,710 in costs. He also was ordered to pay $9,600 in restitution and to attend the state bar's ethics school.
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 Allen's public reprimand.
Allen was admitted to the bar in Florida on April 14, 2011, according to his profile at the state bar website. No prior discipline before the state bar is listed on Allen's profile.
Allegations against Allen stem from a quiet title action for which his law firm was hired in June 2016, a civil lawsuit pertaining to a fraudulent real estate transaction for which Allen was hired in August 2015 and a post dissolution matter for which Allen was retained in April of last year.
In the quiet title action, Allen was alleged to have failed to diligently handle the client's matter, to have prepared an incomplete draft complaint and that he didn't maintain adequate communication regarding the case's status, according to the referee's report. The client subsequently terminated Allen's representation.
In the civil lawsuit, Allen allegedly received legal fees to file the case but did not diligently pursue matter on the client's behalf, according to the referee's report. Allen drafted the initial complaint and made revisions but file no formal complaint with the court, did not clearly communicate with the client about a representation timeline or the case's status.
"The client made repeated attempts to contact [Allen] for case information, without success," the referee's report said.