Daniel Uhlfelder became a prominent critic of Gov. Ron DeSantis’ public health policies six years ago as tensions simmered over measures to slow the spread of COVID-19.
First, he filed a lawsuit that called for the closure of public beaches. Then came his one-man protests, wherein he strolled amid sunbathers and swimmers dressed as the Grim Reaper. So strong were his convictions that Uhlfelder later launched an unsuccessful campaign as a Democrat for Florida attorney general.
Then came trouble. The Florida Bar accused Uhlfelder of misconduct related to his lawsuit against the governor, filing a disciplinary case that could result in the suspension of his law license. The complaint alleges that he included the names of two other lawyers on an appeal of the case without their knowledge.
Uhlfelder, a longtime civil litigator, admitted he should have communicated better, but denied wrongdoing. The two years of tangled litigation that has followed flummoxed those who know Uhlfelder best.
Several prominent witnesses testified on his behalf in a hearing last fall. They included former Florida Supreme Court Justice R. Fred Lewis and U.S. District Judge Donald Middlebrooks, for whom Uhlfelder once clerked.
They described him as a lawyer of high moral character who would never mislead a court.
“I’m dismayed, frankly, by this case,” Middlebrooks said.
A lawsuit, then a complaint
Uhlfelder, a lawyer who’d practiced in northern Florida for more than two decades, was disturbed that DeSantis didn’t order the closure of public beaches in the pandemic’s early days. He sued DeSantis in Tallahassee’s circuit court in the spring of 2020, seeking an amended statewide “safer-at-home” order.
His lawsuit caught the interest of another lawyer, William Gautier Kitchen, who soon joined the case as co-counsel. Kitchen, according to court records, persuaded Uhlfelder to bring on a third lawyer, Marie Mattox, who had expertise in government litigation.
Kitchen and Mattox worked with Uhlfelder to prepare the case for a hearing. They later appeared together in court.
It was understood, according to court records, that Uhlfelder would do most of the work and the other two attorneys would assist as they could. In early April 2020, he wrote an email to the pair, expressing appreciation for their help.
“I’m honored to be a part of it,” Kitchen replied. “Thank you! I’m confident we will be doing a lot of business together in the future … but for money next time! You made a very wise choice getting Marie involved! Let’s whip some ass.”
Tallahassee Judge Kevin Carroll heard arguments from Uhlfelder’s team and DeSantis’ attorneys before deciding to dismiss the case.
Ruling from the bench, Carroll noted that Uhlfelder had “an understandable concern” and pursued the case in good faith. But the judge opined that he was being asked to substitute his own judgment for the governor’s.
Nevertheless, Carroll encouraged Uhlfelder to bring the case to the 1st District Court of Appeal.
“I do think this is a matter of importance,” the judge said. “And if the 1st District tells me that I’m wrong and I do have the authority, then I’m glad to address it and go from there.”
Uhlfelder discussed an appeal by email with Kitchen and Mattox, records show.
Months later came trouble for Uhlfelder. The appeals court deemed the case “frivolous” and asked the lawyers to explain why they should not face sanctions.
In subsequent messages exchanged between the three lawyers, Mattox wrote that she and Kitchen had not agreed to be part of the appeal. She asked Uhlfelder to tell the court their names had been added by mistake.
Uhlfelder vehemently disagreed, writing back that Kitchen and Mattox had been listed on all the court paperwork.
“There was no mistake,” he wrote. “You are my attorneys on this. If you suggest otherwise I will advise the court … I am so amazed you would do this to me as your client and co-counsel.”
The appeals court referred the matter to the Florida Bar.
Kitchen and Mattox initially repeated that they were unaware their names would be on the appeal, according to court records. But messages they exchanged with Uhlfelder showed he kept them in the loop about his plans to appeal. The lawyers disputed that they agreed to have their names on the appeal, according to the records.
In one exchange with Kitchen, cited in court records, Uhlfelder lamented, “I hate losing.”
“This is not a loss,” Kitchen replied. “Simply a first step in a long process.”
A grievance committee recommended a diversionary program for Kitchen and Mattox.
Uhlfelder, meanwhile, faced a possible suspension of his law license.
The discipline case
The Florida Bar filed a complaint against Uhlfelder in January 2024, alleging that he made “misrepresentations” to the appellate court and the other attorneys that were “prejudicial to the administration of justice.” By failing to correct the record, the complaint alleged that he “perpetrated false statements.”
Uhlfelder’s attorney, Scott Tozian, in a September court hearing acknowledged there should have been more discussion about whether the attorneys wanted their names on the appeal, but asserted there was no deception.
“But they were copied on everything and there was no attempt at concealing this from Mr. Kitchen and Ms. Mattox,” Tozian argued.
Shanee Hinson, a lawyer for the Bar, said in the hearing that Uhlfelder had “unilaterally” added the names without their permission, and that doing so was a misrepresentation.
“I believe that Mr. Uhlfelder at this point is just looking for any loophole he can find to avoid taking responsibility for his actions,” she said, according to a transcript of the hearing.
Several lawyers testified about Uhlfelder’s character.
Lewis, the former Supreme Court justice, said he had known Uhlfelder for years and performed Uhlfelder’s marriage ceremony in chambers at the high court. He called him a lawyer of the “highest moral character.”
“I believe Daniel to be as principled as any young lawyer I’ve encountered in my 50 years of practice,” Lewis said. “And I think this whole process, this is destroying a young man because he cares so much about the law.”
He said that as a justice, it didn’t matter to him whose names were listed on an appellate brief. He was usually only concerned with the arguments they’d written.
Middlebrooks, the federal judge for whom Uhlfelder once clerked, called him a person of “high ethics.”
“I don’t know what possible motive people could say he had in making a misrepresentation in this case,” Middlebrooks said.
On Tuesday, Judge Gregory Stuart Parker, the Taylor County circuit judge appointed to oversee the disciplinary case, recommended that Uhlfelder be admonished and required him to complete an ethics class.
The judge’s finding is the lightest discipline possible and far less severe than a suspension.
Lawyers for the Bar have the option of appealing the recommendation to the Florida Supreme Court, which will have final say over the discipline Uhlfelder receives.
©2025 Tampa Bay Times. Visit tampabay.com. Distributed by Tribune Content Agency, LLC.
