Case 6:15-cv-00880-RBD-TBS Document 83 Filed 07/24/17 Page 1 of 7 PageID 464
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
MIDDLE DISTRICT OF FLORIDA
ORLANDO DIVISION
JERMAINE KENT,
Plaintiff,
v. Case No. 6:15-cv-880-Orl-37TBS
ZACHARY BROWN,
Defendant.
_____________________________________
ORDER
As detailed in the Court’s April 5 Order (Doc. 68), attorney Paul E. Bross has a
penchant for untimeliness. The Undersigned has addressed this grievance with Mr. Bross
on a number of occasions—including a November 9, 2016 show cause hearing
(“November 9 Hearing”) (see Doc. 40). Still, the behavior remained unremedied.
Ultimately, Mr. Bross’s failure to timely respond to pending motions for summary
judgment in March and April of 2017 was the straw that broke the camel’s back.
On April 5, 2017, the Court entered an order: (1) detailing the breadth of
Mr. Bross’s dilatory conduct in two specific cases; (2) exemplifying his continued
contumacy within this District following the November 9 Hearing; and (3) referring these
matters to the District’s grievance committee (“Committee”) for a report and
recommendation. (Doc 68 (“Referral Order”).) In doing so, the Referral Order asked the
Committee: (1) whether Mr. Bross’s conduct should be reported to the Florida Bar;
(2) whether Mr. Bross should be removed from the Bar of the Middle District of Florida;
-1-
㻌
Case 6:15-cv-00880-RBD-TBS Document 83 Filed 07/24/17 Page 2 of 7 PageID 465
and (3) whether any additional sanctions—including monetary fines—should be
imposed. (Id. at 7.) The Committee responded to each of these inquiries in a Report and
Recommendation dated July 5, 2017. (Doc. 82 (“R&R”).)
The Committee’s findings are as follows. In addition to the failures detailed in the
Referral Order, the Committee’s investigation revealed that Mr. Bross has habitually:
(1) failed to appear at depositions; (2) cancelled depositions at the last minute;
(3) appeared late to mediation; (4) failed to satisfy monetary sanctions obligations; and
(4) failed to respond to correspondence from opposing counsel—including
correspondence required by Local Rule 3.01(g)—costing opposing counsel a great deal of
time and money. (Id. at 3.) Notably, the R&R details the hoops the Committee jumped
through to obtain a response from Mr. Bross concerning the Referral Order. (Id. at 4.) In
the end, Mr. Bross submitted his response a full month beyond the original deadline, and
the Committee found it to be “flippant in tone, arrogant, and not particularly
conciliatory.” (Id.) Based on his letter, the Committee concluded that Mr. Bross: (1) “does
not meaningfully take responsibility for his own actions”; and (2) is not cognizant of the
burden his actions have placed on his clients and opposing counsel. (Id.)
Even more concerning was the Committee’s revelation of sanctions levied against
Mr. Bross earlier this year by the Florida Bar (“2017 Bar Case”). (See id. at 4-5.) As set forth
in the R&R, the Florida Bar complaint and subsequent order discussed Mr. Bross’s
conduct in four state court cases, which included “numerous failures to appear in court—
one of which resulted in his client’s sentencing without the benefit of counsel present.”
(Id. at 5.) Thereafter, Mr. Bross entered into a consent judgment with the Florida Bar,
-2-
㻌
Case 6:15-cv-00880-RBD-TBS Document 83 Filed 07/24/17 Page 3 of 7 PageID 466
whereby he was: (1) suspended from the Florida Bar for ten days with automatic
reinstatement; (2) required to undergo a practice analysis by the disciplinary arm of the
Florida Bar; and (3) required to pay costs totaling $5,100. (Id.)
On the whole, the Committee found that:
(1) Mr. Bross has taken on too much work;
(2) Mr. Bross has “demonstrated widespread, consistent failures to timely
file, timely respond to the Court, appear in Court and elsewhere when
required, timely respond to opposing counsel . . . and properly manage,
organize, and calendar his cases”;
(3) his conduct has been prejudicial to the administration of justice;
(4) his conduct has substantially fallen below that required of him as a
member of the Bar of the Middle District of Florida for a material period
of time;
(5) his conduct violates the Florida Rules of Professional Conduct requiring
diligence (Rule 4-1.3), prohibiting dilatory conduct (Rule 4-3.2), and
requiring fairness to the opposing party and opposing counsel
(Rule 4-3.4); and
(6) his conduct violates the Local Rules requiring cooperation with the
Committee (Rule 2.04(f)), cooperation among attorneys to prevent delay
(Rule 20.4 (h)), and prompt meeting and conferral (Rule 3.01(g)).
(Id. at 5.) The Committee also recommends that the Court impose a number of sanctions.
(Id. at 6–7.)
-3-
㻌
Case 6:15-cv-00880-RBD-TBS Document 83 Filed 07/24/17 Page 4 of 7 PageID 467
Upon consideration of the findings and recommendations detailed in the R&R, as
well as the Undersigned’s own experiences with Mr. Bross, the Court agrees with
Committee and finds that the R&R is due to be adopted save for one exception.
Specifically, the Court declines to grant opposing counsel leave to move for attorney fees
as consequence of this Order. (See Doc. 82, p. 6.) The Court will also require Mr. Bross to
serve a copy of this Order on opposing counsel in every action that he has pending in this
District.
Hence it is ORDERED AND ADJUDGED as follows:
1. The Report and Recommendation of the Grievance Committee (Doc. 82) is
ADOPTED IN PART.
a. The Court declines to impose additional monetary sanctions sua
sponte or allow opposing counsel the opportunity to move for the
imposition of fees as a consequence of this Order.
b. In all other respects, the R&R is adopted.
2. Beginning Wednesday, August 23, 2017, and continuing through Friday,
February 23, 2018, attorney Paul E. Bross is SUSPENDED from
membership in the Bar of the U.S. District Court for the Middle District of
Florida.
a. Mr. Bross is DIRECTED to immediately serve a copy of this
Order on opposing counsel of every pending action in which he
has appeared in this District. Prior to August 23, 2017, Mr. Bross
must certify in writing that he has complied with this directive
-4-
㻌
Case 6:15-cv-00880-RBD-TBS Document 83 Filed 07/24/17 Page 5 of 7 PageID 468
Case 6:15-cv-00880-RBD-TBS Document 83 Filed 07/24/17 Page 6 of 7 PageID 469
a. The names and case numbers of each federal court case in which
he has appeared since reinstatement; and
b. Whether he has been the subject of any motions to compel for
dilatory practices, show cause orders, or motions for sanctions in
those cases.
5. The Clerk is DIRECTED to:
a. Send a copy of this Order and the Grievance Committee’s Report
and Recommendation (Doc. 82) to the Florida Bar.
b. Docket this Order in Perez v. Harrelson, Case No. 6:15-cv-879
(“Perez Action”). 1
c. Distribute a copy of this order to all judicial officers in the Middle
District of Florida.
DONE AND ORDERED in Chambers in Orlando, Florida, on July 24, 2017.
Copies to:
㻌
1 The Referral Order and the R&R were previously docketed in both the instant
action and the Perez Action.
-6-
㻌
Case 6:15-cv-00880-RBD-TBS Document 83 Filed 07/24/17 Page 7 of 7 PageID 470
Counsel of Record in:
(1) Perez v. Harrelson, No. 6:15-cv-879
(2) Kent v. Brown, No. 6:15-cv-880
(3) Pellechio v. Grose, No. 6:15-cv-1056
(4) Morrison v. Armstrong, No. 6:16-cv-1809
(5) Truex v. City of Palm Bay, No. 6:16-cv-1810
Drew Sorrell, Chairman of the Grievance Committee for the Orlando Division of the
Middle District of Florida
The Florida Bar
All District and Magistrate Judges in each division of the U.S. District Court for the
Middle District of Florida
㻌
-7-
㻌
