After filing a lawsuit on behalf of a client, a Sunrise attorney filed for dismissal of that lawsuit without telling the client, news the client found out elsewhere.
And in the professional discipline process, the lawyer didn’t consistently show up with all the required materials — or consistently show up at all.
That is some of what stopped the legal career of Mariano Gonzalez Jr., disbarred last month by the state Supreme Court.
The disbarment was immediate because Gonzalez had been suspended since Oct. 10, 2023, after he didn’t answer the Florida Bar counsel’s inquiries about the client grievance filed after the dismissed case.
Discipline case referee Judge Veronica Diaz’s report said Gonzalez testified that “he is not disputing the facts and offers no excuse for his misconduct. Rather, he has been fighting personal issues and believed he was ready to comply the last time he appeared (before Diaz).
“(Gonzalez) contends that the client was not harmed by the dismissal without prejudice as the matter was settled.”
Diaz also wrote that Gonzalez says “he did not neglect the client and that his failure to comply with court orders has only damaged (Gonzalez), himself. (Gonzalez) indicated he was embarrassed by the situation and was seeking a rehabilitation sanction.”
Gonzalez had been a member of the Florida Bar since 1993.
Dismissal in the dark
Though Miami-Dade didn’t get a direct hit, a Sept. 10, 2017, belt from Hurricane Irma lashed several areas of the county. Southwest Miami-Dade resident Anthony Diaz, of no relation to the Judge Veronica Diaz, hired Gonzalez to sue Tower Hill Prime Insurance Co. when the firm denied his $25,000 claim for roof damage he credited to Irma.
Gonzalez filed the lawsuit on Oct. 22, 2020. Tower Hill filed a motion to dismiss the case on Feb. 22, 2022, after Gonzalez, despite two court orders to do so, didn’t provide a written list of questions for Tower Hill as part of the discovery process. On April 6, 2022, the day before a hearing on Tower Hill’s motion, Gonzalez filed a plaintiff’s voluntary motion to dismiss without prejudice.
“However, (Gonzalez) failed to advise his client, Anthony Diaz, of his actions,” the referee’s report said. “Mr. Diaz was unaware (Gonzalez) was even considering filing a dismissal of his case.
“The trial court entered an order granting the voluntary dismissal without prejudice. That order was entered on July 20, 2023. (Gonzalez) failed to advise his client that the matter had been voluntarily dismissed without prejudice.”
By the time Gonzalez went back to refile the complaint before the statute of limitations ran out, he saw Diaz had hired Christopher J. Maranges to handle the case. Maranges and Madeline Moreira of Maranges Law ended the case with a settlement on Nov. 13, 2023.
“Had I not done due diligence, my case would be dismissed with prejudice on Sept. 10, 2022, giving me no chance at recuperating my money,” Diaz wrote to the Florida Bar in his complaint.
During the Florida Bar’s investigation of the grievance, Gonzalez didn’t provide the proper written response to the Bar, though he was granted extensions that he requested. That resulted in his Oct. 10, 2023, suspension.
The matter of Gonzalez filing the dismissal without telling his client remained under investigation. In January 2025, a subpoena demanded he appear before the 17th Judicial Circuit Grievance Committee via Zoom at 2 p.m. March 10, 2025. By March 3, 2025, Diaz was supposed to email Bar counsel or put in Dropbox all retainer agreements he had with Diaz and Diaz’s entire client file.
“However, (Gonzalez) untimely emailed the Bar with a Dropbox link just before the live hearing on March 10, 2025, at 1:17 p.m. that included documents purporting to be the client file of Anthony Diaz,” the referee’s report said. “During the hearing, while under oath, (Gonzalez) acknowledged that communications between himself and Anthony Diaz were not included in the Dropbox link and would be provided later.
“However, (Gonzalez) failed to supplement his submission to the Bar.”
During the final hearing in the disciplinary matter, on April 1 of this year, attorney Marybeth Cullinan testified that she met Gonzalez as opposing counsel on another Irma case. Before reading in December 2023, she didn’t know he’d been suspended two months earlier.
“She sent an email to (Gonzalez) and his co-counsel regarding the order and got no response,” the referee’s report said. “At no time did (Gonzalez) advise Ms. Cullinan as opposing counsel that he had been suspended from the practice of law, as required.”
