To name a few, Denaro found Strems violated rules governing meritorious claims and contention, expediting litigation, informing a client of status of representation, fairness to opposing party and counsel, criminal or fraudulent conduct and candor toward the tribunal.

Denaro said Strems had also failed to ensure that the lawyers at his firm complied with rules for acting with reasonable diligence and promptness when representing a client. She noted that clients and Judge Mavel Ruiz testified that callers "simply could not get through to an attorney when they called the law firm."

"The testimony in the record is that it took anywhere from 45 to 60 minutes before a para-professional would answer the phone," Denaro said. "While on the phone, lawyers and callers would hear, 'You are number 20 in line.' 'You are number 15 in line.' This inability for clients and judges to reach an attorney demonstrates a failure of the firm's infrastructure put into place by Mr. Strems."

Denaro noted that former litigation manager at Strems Law Firm Christopher Aguirre testified that he and other lawyers were frequently double-booked because of the volume of cases at the firm, which received weekly sanctions orders of up to $15,000 between 2016 and 2017. Denaro said Aguirre testified that Strems was aware of those orders and took a "hands-on" approach to problem cases.

And though the testimony suggested Strems made efforts to remedy issues, Denaro said those were "insufficient and unreasonable" because the firm was taking on 20 to 50 new cases a week.

Outside interference?

Strems' attorney Scott Tozian said he was disappointed with the result, but noted that Denaro relied predominantly on sanctions orders from Florida judges.

"They [the sanctions orders] say what they say. And so that was not surprising to me," Tozian said. "What I was gratified by is that she [Denaro] didn't find any of the other allegations that were contained in the affidavits of the judges, such as a duplicitous filing scheme, or that they got all their clients by solicitation or these other things, she did not find that any of that was proven by The Florida Bar."

Tozian also highlighted that he's found through a recent public records request that the bar was communicating with insurance industry lobbyists about Strems — something he claims indicates that the insurance industry had a hand in the discipline case.

"They're supposed to protect the public, not pursue private interests," Tozian said.

Tozian said his main takeaway from the Strems case is that his firm's caseload grew too quickly.

"That was the cause of lawyers not getting things done as expeditiously as they should have, and these sanctions orders resulted," Tozian said. "But there was lots and lots of testimony during the course of the six-day trial we had to the effect that Mr. Strems took great pains and expended a lot of money to improve the system, to make sure that they were providing clients with the best possible representation. I do want the public to know that he did everything humanly possible, including spend a lot of money, to get the office operating properly, and they've had thousands of clients for whom they've done very good work."

Miami attorneys Benedict Kuehne, Mark Kamilar and Kendall Coffey also represent Strems.

Derek Womack and Arlene Sankel represented The Florida Bar, which declined to comment.

Denaro will hear arguments on discipline recommendations Thursday, and has until Oct. 8 to submit her final report to the state Supreme Court.

Click here to watch the oral ruling

Allegations Mount Against South Florida Lawyer Accused of Cheating Insurers: 'Something Else Going on Here'

Anatomy of an Insurance Scam: Citizens Property, Florida Bar Detail a Florida Lawyer's Alleged Fraud