The Florida Bar v. Peter G. Herman

Summary

The court held that Herman could present an advice-of-counsel defense to allegations that he intentionally made false or misleading disclosures in his personal Chapter 7 bankruptcy schedules. Because the referee categorically rejected that defense and relied in part on proceedings applying a lower burden of proof, the court remanded for further proceedings and an amended report. The court also clarified that the Bar must prove intentional dishonesty by clear and convincing evidence, not merely that Herman failed to choose the most prudent disclosure approach.