On Thursday, September 8, 2022, the Supreme Court of the State of Florida ordered the suspension of Saint Lucie attorney Derek Michael Aronoff for failure to provide diligent and competent representation to a client.

The case, titled The Florida Bar v. Derek Michael Aronoff was brought by the Florida Bar. Case number #SC22-228.

The charges cited Rules 4-1.1 (2006), 4-1.1(2017), 4-1.2(a) (2006), 4-1.2(a)(2017), 4-1.2(c) (2017), 4-1.3, and 4-1.4(a) of the Rules Regulating the Florida Bar, which state:

A lawyer shall provide competent representation to a client. Competent representation requires the legal knowledge, skill, thoroughness, and preparation reasonably necessary for the representation;

A lawyer must provide competent representation to a client. Competent representation requires the legal knowledge, skill, thoroughness, and preparation reasonably necessary for the representation;

A lawyer shall abide by a client’s decisions concerning the objectives of representation and shall reasonably consult with the client as to the means by which they are to be pursued. A lawyer shall abide by a client’s decision whether to make or accept an offer of settlement of a matter. In a criminal case, the lawyer shall abide by the client’s decision, after consultation with the lawyer, as to a plea to be entered, whether to waive jury trial, and whether the client will testify;

A lawyer must abide by a client’s decisions concerning the objectives of representation, and, as required by rule 4-1.4, must reasonably consult with the client as to the means by which they are to be pursued. A lawyer may take such action on behalf of the client as is impliedly authorized to carry out the representation. A lawyer must abide by a client’s decision whether to settle a matter. In a criminal case, the lawyer must abide by the client’s decision, after consultation with the lawyer, as to a plea to be entered, whether to waive jury trial, and whether the client will testify;

If not prohibited by law or rule, a lawyer and client may agree to limit the objectives or scope of the representation if the limitation is reasonable under the circumstances and the client consents in writing after consultation. If the attorney and client agree to limit the scope of the representation, the lawyer shall advise the client regarding applicability of the rule prohibiting communication with a represented person;

A lawyer must not counsel a client to engage, or assist a client, in conduct that the lawyer knows or reasonably should know is criminal or fraudulent. However, a lawyer may discuss the legal consequences of any proposed course of conduct with a client and may counsel or assist a client to make a good faith effort to determine the validity, scope, meaning, or application of the law.

A lawyer shall act with reasonable diligence and promptness in representing a client;

A lawyer shall: (1) promptly inform the client of any decision or circumstance with respect to which the client’s informed consent, as defined in terminology, is required by these rules; (2) reasonably consult with the client about the means by which the client’s objectives are to be accomplished; (3) keep the client reasonably informed about the status of the matter; (4) promptly comply with reasonable requests for information; and (5) consult with the client about any relevant limitation on the lawyer’s conduct when the lawyer knows or reasonably should know that the client expects assistance not permitted by the Rules of Professional Conduct or other law.

The following are as alleged and summarized from the filing:

The respondent engaged in misconduct by failing to provide a diligent and competent representation to a client. The respondent also failed to abide by his client’s decision. Moreover, respondent entered into an agreed disposition before informing his client.

The Report of Referee states:

“Jennifer Holloran (formerly known as Jennifer Sonnenberg) hired respondent on or about June 5, 2017, to represent her in a post-dissolution of marriage case and paid respondent a total of $6,091.00 for his legal fees.

Ms. Holloran needed respondent’s legal assistance to seek an income deduction order after her former husband became delinquent in making his required alimony and child support payments.”

The Report of Referee continues:

“Respondent failed to pursue Ms. Holloran’s claims for delinquent alimony and child support after the former husband filed a petition to abate the alimony payments and reduce the child support payments on June 13, 2017.

Respondent overstated Ms. Holloran’s income in’ discovery as being approximately 25 percent higher than her actual income.”

The Report of Referee further alleges:

“In response, before informing Ms. Holloran, respondent withdrew Ms. Holloran’s affirmative defenses and entered into an agreed disposition whereby the former husband woould not pursue sanctions against respondent and Ms. Holloran in exchange for her agreeing not to pursue collection of the past due alimony and child support payments.”

The Report of Referee additionally notes:

“When Ms. Holloran reviewed the agreed order reducing her child support payments and eliminating her alimony, respondent agreed to pay her $7,500.00 at a rate of $100.00 per month and to refund her legal fee.”

The Report of Referee Accepting Consent Judgment recommended that Respondent be found guilty of misconduct and that he be disciplined by 91-day suspension and for Respondent to pay The Florida Bar’s costs amounting to $3,704.10.

With the foregoing facts and discussions, the court ruled against the Respondent in relation to the above-cited Rules of Professional Conduct

The Disposition reads:

“The uncontested report of the referee is approved and respondent is suspended from the practice of law for ninety-one days, effective thirty days from the date of this order so that respondent can close out his practice and protect the interests of existing clients. . .”

Judgment is entered for The Florida Bar, 651 East Jefferson Street, Tallahassee, Florida 32399-2300, for recovery of costs from Derek Michael Aronoff in the amount of $3,704.10, for which sum let execution issue.”

Prior to the suspension, Mr. Aronoff practiced in Saint Lucie, Florida. He has been licensed in Florida. His info can be found on The Florida Bar.

A copy of the original filing can be found here.