Doc
Post
E-signatures
PlayMaker
Second Chair
Verbatim
Sign in
→
Request access
In re Neusom
, No. 2:23-cv-00503-JLB-NPM (Middle District of Fla. (M.D. FLA) 2025)
Case details
Full caption
In re Thomas Grant Neusom
Country
United States
Jurisdiction
Federal
Court
Middle District of Florida (M.D. FLA)
Decided
2025
UNITED
STATES
DISTRICT
COURT
MIDDLE
DISTRICT
OF
FLORIDA
FORT
MYERS
DIVISION
IN
RE:
THOMAS
GRANT
NEUSOM,
Case
No:
2:24-mc-2-JES
OPINION
AND
ORDER
This
matter
comes
before
the
Court
on
review
of
the
Report
and
Recommendation
of
the
Grievance
Committee
(the
Report
and
Recommendation).
The
Report
and
Recommendation,
first
filed
in
Clark
Pear
LLC
v.
MVP
Realty
Associates
LLC,
Case
No.
2:23-cv-
00503-JLB-NPM,
Doc.
#44
(M.D.
Fla.
Jan.
12,
2024),
makes
certain
findings
of
misconduct
by
attorney
Thomas
Grant
Neusom
(Mr.
Neusom)
and
recommends
certain
disciplinary
actions.
On
January
15,
2024,
Mr.
Neusom
filed
Plaintiff’s
Objection
and
Response
to
the
Grievance
Committee
Report
and
Recommendation
(Doc.
#45
in
Clark
Pear
LLC).
On
January
31,
2024,
Chief
Judge
Timothy
J.
Corrigan
directed
the
grievance
matter
be
handled
in
this
miscellaneous
case
and
designated
the
undersigned
to
address
the
matter.
(Case
No.
2:24-mc-2-JES,
Doc.
#1.)
On
February
2,
2024,
pursuant
to
Local
Rule
2.04(c)(4)(F),
of
the
Local
Rules
of
the
United
States
District
Court
for
the
Middle
District
of
Florida
(Local
Rules),
the
undersigned
ordered
Mr.
Neusom
to
file
a
response
to
the
Report
and
Recommendation
or
to
notify
the
Court
that
his
prior
Objection
and
Response
would
Case
2:24-mc-00002-JES
Document
6
Filed
03/08/24
Page
1
of
7
PageID
24
-
2
-
constitute
his
response.
(Doc.
#5.)
No
additional
response
or
notice
has
been
filed,
and
the
time
to
do
so
has
expired.
I.
Mr.
Neusom
was
plaintiff’s
counsel
in
Clark
Pear
LLC
v.
MVP
Realty
Associates
LLC,
Case
No.
2:23-cv-00503-JLB-NPM
(Clark
Pear).
On
August
10,
2023,
Magistrate
Judge
Nicholas
Mizell
made
a
referral
to
the
Grievance
Committee
for
the
Middle
District
of
Florida,
Fort
Myers
Division,
to
investigate
whether
Mr.
Neusom’s
conduct
related
to
Clarke
Pear
fell
short
of
professional
and
ethical
norms.
The
resulting
Report
and
Recommendation
(Doc.
#3)
summarizes
the
background
of
the
underlying
case,
describes
the
Grievance
Committee’s
investigation,
summarizes
the
relevant
standards
of
conduct
for
an
attorney,
and
sets
forth
its
findings.
(Id.)
Specifically,
the
Grievance
Committee
found
probable
cause
existed
to
(1)
find
that
Mr.
Neusom
violated
Rule
4-1.3
by
failing
to
act
with
reasonable
diligence;
(2)
believe
Mr.
Neusom
violated
Rules
4-3.3(a)(3)
and
4-8.4(c)
by
making
misrepresentations
to
the
Court;
(3)
find
Mr.
Neusom
violated
Rule
4-3.4(c)
by
knowingly
disobeying
an
obligation
under
the
rules
of
a
tribunal;
and
(4)
find
that
Mr.
Neusom
violated
Florida’s
Rules
of
Professional
Conduct
in
multiple
ways.
The
Grievance
Committee
concluded
that
sanctions
were
in
order
and
recommended
specific
sanctions
to
be
imposed.
Case
2:24-mc-00002-JES
Document
6
Filed
03/08/24
Page
2
of
7
PageID
25
-
3
-
II.
Although
it
is
not
entirely
clear,
Mr.
Neusom’s
Objection
and
Response
seems
to
argue
in
part
that
sanctions
may
not
be
imposed
after
the
underlying
case
was
closed.
The
district
judge
handling
the
underlying
case
previously
stated:
Moreover,
with
respect
to
the
referral
to
the
Grievance
Committee,
The
Local
Rules
for
the
Middle
District
of
Florida
provide
that
“[a]
judge
...
can
initiate
an
investigation
of
alleged
lawyer
misconduct.”
M.D.
Fla.
L.R.
2.04(c)(4).
Plaintiff
does
not
cite
any
source
setting
a
time
limit
for
when
such
investigation
may
be
initiated
and
the
Court
is
unaware
of
any
such
source.
Accordingly,
the
objection
to
the
Grievance
Committee
Order
is
overruled.
Clark
Pear,
LLC
v.
MVP
Realty
Associates,
LLC,
2:23-CV-503-JLB-
NPM,
2023
WL
7297401,
at
*2
(M.D.
Fla.
Nov.
6,
2023).
“It
is
well
established
that
a
federal
court
may
consider
collateral
issues
after
an
action
is
no
longer
pending.”
See
Cooter
&
Gell
v.
Hartmarx
Corp.,
496
U.S.
384,
395
(1990)
(a
voluntary
dismissal
does
not
expunge
Rule
11
sanctions).
See
also
Law
Sols.
of
Chicago
LLC
v.
Corbett,
971
F.3d
1299,
1316
(11th
Cir.
2020)
(rejecting
argument
that
Bankruptcy
Court
could
not
impose
sanctions
after
case
was
closed
and
never
reopened)
(collecting
cases).
The
Court
concludes
that
the
remand
of
the
underlying
case
to
state
court
does
not
divest
the
court
of
jurisdiction
to
impose
disciplinary
action
pursuant
to
the
Report
and
Recommendation
of
a
grievance
committee.
Case
2:24-mc-00002-JES
Document
6
Filed
03/08/24
Page
3
of
7
PageID
26
-
4
-
III.
“A
lawyer
appearing
in
the
Middle
District
[of
Florida]
must
remain
familiar
with,
and
is
bound
by,
the
rules
governing
the
professional
conduct
of
a
member
of
The
Florida
Bar.”
M.D.
Fla.
R.
2.01(e).
The
Court
has
reviewed
the
record,
the
Report
and
Recommendations,
and
the
Objections
and
Response
carefully,
and
has
applied
a
de
novo
standard
of
review.
The
Court
overrules
the
Objections
filed
by
Mr.
Neusom.
The
Court
agrees
with,
and
therefore
adopts,
the
findings
of
the
Grievance
Committee.
The
Court
finds
that
clear
and
convincing
evidence
establishes
the
lawyer
misconduct
identified
in
the
Report
and
Recommendation.
The
Court
also
agrees
that
the
sanctions
recommended
by
the
Grievance
Committee
are
appropriate
and
proportional,
and
therefore
will
impose
the
substance
of
the
sanctions
recommended
by
the
Grievance
Committee.
Accordingly,
it
is
hereby
ORDERED:
1.
The
Objections
to
the
Report
and
Recommendation
(Doc.
#45)
are
OVERRULED
.
2.
The
Grievance
Committee’s
Report
and
Recommendation
(Doc.
#3)
is
ACCEPTED,
ADOPTED,
and
incorporated
herein
.
3.
After
de
novo
review
of
the
Committee’s
Report
and
Recommendation,
the
Court
finds
by
clear
and
convincing
evidence
that
Mr.
Neusom’s
behavior
violated
Florida
Bar
Case
2:24-mc-00002-JES
Document
6
Filed
03/08/24
Page
4
of
7
PageID
27
-
5
-
Rules
4-1.3,
4-3.3(a)(3),
4-8.4(c),
and
4-3.4(c),
and
the
Florida
Rules
of
Professional
Conduct.
4.
Mr.
Neusom
is
SUSPENDED
from
the
Bar
of
the
United
States
District
Court
for
the
Middle
District
of
Florida
for
a
period
of
one
(1)
year
.
The
suspension
is
effective
beginning
thirty
(30)
days
from
the
date
of
this
Order.
This
delay
is
intended
to
permit
Mr.
Neusom
to
address
any
existing
case
load
within
the
jurisdiction
of
the
Middle
District
of
Florida
and
protect
the
interests
of
clients
during
his
suspension
5.
Mr.
Neusom
is
PROHIBITED
from
taking
on
new
cases
in
the
United
States
District
Court
for
the
Middle
District
of
Florida,
effective
as
of
the
date
of
this
Order
and
lasting
until
he
is
reinstated
in
the
Bar
of
the
Middle
District
of
Florida
pursuant
to
the
Reinstatement
Conditions
set
forth
below.
6.
The
following
Reinstatement
Conditions
are
SET
and
must
be
completed
before
Mr.
Neusom
is
permitted
to
petition
to
the
Bar
of
the
United
States
District
Court
for
the
Middle
District
of
Florida
for
reinstatement:
A.
During
the
period
of
suspension,
Mr.
Neusom
must:
i.
Attend
and
complete
The
Florida
Bar’s
Professionalism
Workshop;
Case
2:24-mc-00002-JES
Document
6
Filed
03/08/24
Page
5
of
7
PageID
28
-
6
-
ii.
Attend
and
complete
all
aspects
of
a
Law
Practice
Management
CLE;
iii.
Attend
and
complete
all
aspects
of
the
Practicing
with
Professionalism
CLE;
and
iv.
Receive
Counseling
through
the
Florida
Lawyers
Assistance
Program.
B.
Pay
all
outstanding
monetary
sanctions,
fees,
and
costs
levied
against
him,
in
any
federal,
state,
or
disciplinary
actions;
C.
Complete
all
remediation
ordered
by
The
Florida
Bar,
if
any;
D.
Complete
all
remediation
ordered
by
any
court,
including
reporting
of
any
sanction
orders
levied
by
any
court
to
the
appropriate
parties;
E.
Re-read
the
Florida
Rules
of
Professional
Conduct
and
the
Local
Rules
of
the
United
States
District
Court
for
the
Middle
District
of
Florida
in
full
and
certify
in
writing
to
this
Court
that
he
has
done
so;
and
F.
Report
to
the
Court
the
completion
of
subparagraphs
(A)
through
(E)
of
this
paragraph
on
or
before
the
date
marking
the
end
of
the
suspension
period.
7.
The
Clerk
is
DIRECTED
to
forward
a
copy
of
this
Order
to
all
judges
of
the
United
States
District
Court
for
the
Case
2:24-mc-00002-JES
Document
6
Filed
03/08/24
Page
6
of
7
PageID
29
-
7
-
Middle
District
of
Florida
and
to
serve
a
copy
of
this
Order
on
The
Florida
Bar.
DONE
and
ORDERED
at
Fort
Myers,
Florida,
this
8th
day
of
March
2024.
Copies:
Chief
Judge
Lee
Hollander,
Committee
Chair
Attorneys
of
Record
in
Clark
Pear
LLC
v.
MVP
Realty
Assocs.
LLC,
Case
No.
2:23
-
cv
-
503-
JLB-
NPM
(M.D.
Fla.)
Case
2:24-mc-00002-JES
Document
6
Filed
03/08/24
Page
7
of
7
PageID
30
Provenance
Know exactly where this document came from.
Members see the sourcing behind every authority on DocPost — so you can check the record yourself and cite with confidence.
Request access