A Port Orange attorney who expanded her practice into immigration law received a public reprimand, mandatory ethics training, and an order to repay former clients after her unlicensed staff member accepted immigration fees, failed to file visa applications, and in at least one case cashed a client’s money order for personal use.
Dawn Marie Calache is a Florida-licensed attorney based in Port Orange, in Volusia County. She graduated from Florida International University College of Law and was admitted to The Florida Bar in 2016. Her practice covers a broad range of areas including Divorce and Family Law, Estate Planning, Real Estate, and Bankruptcy, serving clients throughout Volusia County and the surrounding area.
The Law Office of Dawn Calache practices Estate Planning, Wills and Trusts, Family Law, Landlord-Tenant matters, Divorce, and Real Estate Law. Her firm’s website is at calachelaw.com, and her profile is listed with the Volusia County Bar Association. Prior to the 2025 disciplinary action, her Florida Bar profile showed no prior misconduct and confirmed she was a member in good standing.
What Happened: The Immigration Practice Expansion
Calache expanded her law practice to include immigration services but failed to ensure that immigration clients received sound legal advice and adequate legal services when she failed to supervise her nonlawyer assistant or communicate adequately with her clients.
The move into immigration law is an understandable one for a general practice attorney in Florida, where large immigrant communities across Volusia County and the greater Central Florida region create consistent demand for work visa assistance and immigration-related legal services. However, expanding into a new area of law carries significant professional responsibility obligations, particularly when nonlawyer staff are involved in the intake and processing of client matters.
According to the Florida Supreme Court’s December 2025 order, Calache did not provide the level of oversight required by Florida Bar rules when her nonlawyer staff member began handling client matters independently. The result was a serious breakdown in the delivery of legal services to vulnerable immigration clients who had paid for visa application assistance.
The Nonlawyer Assistant’s Conduct
The core of the disciplinary matter centered on the conduct of Calache’s unlicensed nonlawyer assistant, who was entrusted with tasks related to the preparation and submission of work visa applications to U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS).
Calache’s nonlawyer assistant accepted legal fees and costs for the purposes of preparing applications for work visas, did not submit the applications and necessary documents to the United States Citizenship and Immigration Services and in at least one instance, cashed a client’s money order in her own name.— The Florida Bar, January 1, 2026 Disciplinary Actions Report (Case No. SC2025-1988)
The assistant’s conduct involved three distinct layers of failure. First, legal fees were collected from clients without the underlying services being delivered. Second, completed or partially completed visa applications and supporting documents were never submitted to USCIS, leaving immigration clients in legal limbo at a critical time in their lives. Third — and most seriously — at least one client’s money order was cashed by the assistant in her own name, representing a direct financial harm to a client who had trusted the law firm with their funds.
Sanctions Imposed by the Florida Supreme Court
Calache received a public reprimand by publication, with the sanction effective immediately following a December 23 court order. The Florida Supreme Court imposed five distinct corrective requirements:
Public Reprimand by Publication — A formal reprimand published in The Florida Bar News, effective December 23, 2025. This appears permanently in Calache’s public disciplinary record and is accessible to any prospective client or employer through the Florida Bar’s online attorney search.
Diversion/Discipline Consultation Service Review — Within 30 days of the court order, Calache was required to schedule a practice review with The Florida Bar’s Diversion/Discipline Consultation Service, which assesses office procedures, case management, and law practice administration to identify and correct systemic weaknesses.
Ethics School Completion — Within six months of the court order, Calache must complete The Florida Bar’s Ethics School, a structured continuing legal education program focused on professional responsibility obligations.
Client Restitution — Within 30 days of the court order, Calache was ordered to repay legal fees to two former clients who paid for immigration services that were not properly delivered by her firm.
Disciplinary Costs — Calache was also ordered to pay The Florida Bar’s costs associated with the investigation and disciplinary proceeding.
The SC2025-1988 case number appears in the Florida Supreme Court’s public records. Unlike attorneys who receive suspensions, Calache was not removed from practice — the public reprimand allows her to continue serving clients while complying with these corrective requirements. See the Florida Bar discipline overview below for more on the range of available sanctions.
Florida Bar Rules at the Center of This Case
The disciplinary action against Calache turns on several core provisions of the Rules Regulating The Florida Bar, particularly those governing supervision of nonlawyer staff and duties to clients:
Rule 4-5.3 — Responsibilities Regarding Nonlawyer Assistants sits at the heart of this case. It requires attorneys to ensure that nonlawyer staff conduct is compatible with professional obligations. Attorneys must directly supervise the work of nonlawyer employees and remain responsible for that conduct if they fail to provide adequate oversight.
Rule 4-1.1 — Competence requires attorneys to provide legally competent representation in any area they undertake, including new practice areas like immigration law. This includes adequate preparation, knowledge, and oversight of how client matters are processed and handled by the firm.
Rule 4-1.3 — Diligence requires attorneys to act with reasonable diligence and promptness. Failing to ensure that visa applications were timely submitted to USCIS reflects a clear breakdown in the diligent management of active client matters.
Rule 4-1.4 — Communication requires attorneys to keep clients reasonably informed about the status of their matters and to respond promptly to client inquiries. The disciplinary findings explicitly cite Calache’s failure to communicate adequately with her immigration clients.
Rule 4-1.15 — Safekeeping Property requires attorneys to safeguard client funds and property at all times. The fact that a staff member was able to cash a client’s money order in her own name directly implicates the firm’s obligations to maintain proper controls over client funds.
For a broader guide to how these rules are enforced, see LegalClarity’s overview of Florida attorney discipline rules and sanctions. You can also review the Florida Bar discipline section below for more context on how the system works.
How Calache Attempted to Mitigate the Harm
Notably, the Florida Supreme Court’s record reflects that Calache attempted to mitigate the harm to clients by retaining another lawyer to review the immigration files and assist the clients with pending matters. This is a meaningful factor in disciplinary proceedings under Florida Bar rules.
Attorneys who take proactive steps to correct harm, cooperate with Bar investigations, and make clients whole generally fare better in disciplinary outcomes than those who do not. Calache’s decision to bring in outside immigration counsel to review and remediate the affected files — rather than allowing the situation to continue or go unaddressed — is consistent with her receiving a public reprimand rather than a suspension or disbarment. The court also ordered direct restitution of legal fees to two former clients as part of the sanction, ensuring financial accountability alongside the corrective measures.
Lessons for Attorneys: Supervision of Nonlawyer Staff
The Calache matter offers clear and important lessons for any attorney considering expanding their practice — particularly into high-stakes areas like immigration law where client welfare and legal status may be at risk:
Supervision is non-delegable. Under Rule 4-5.3, an attorney’s obligation to ensure proper conduct by nonlawyer staff cannot be transferred away. Even if a trusted staff member handles day-to-day tasks, the attorney remains professionally responsible for the quality and integrity of that work. Regular review of files, billing records, and client communications is essential.
Expanding practice areas requires genuine competence. Rule 4-1.1 requires competence not just in craft but in management of new practice areas. Attorneys entering immigration law for the first time should invest in training, consult with experienced immigration practitioners, and build robust intake and case management processes before accepting paying clients.
Client funds require scrupulous oversight. The fact that a staff member was able to cash a client’s money order in her own name signals a breakdown in the firm’s financial controls. Attorneys are obligated under Rule 4-1.15 to maintain proper trust accounting and to ensure client funds are never accessible or misused by unauthorized individuals.
For guidance on best practices in attorney supervision of nonlawyer staff, the Florida Bar’s ACAP program and the Rules Regulating The Florida Bar are primary resources. The American Bar Association’s Professional Responsibility resources also provide model rules and commentary applicable to nonlawyer supervision nationwide.
About Florida’s Attorney Disciplinary System
The Florida Bar, in coordination with the Florida Supreme Court and the Bar’s Division of Lawyer Regulation, administers a statewide disciplinary system governing the professional conduct of more than 115,000 Bar members. The process typically begins when the Attorney Consumer Assistance Program (ACAP) receives a written complaint from a client, another attorney, a judge, or another source.
Disciplinary outcomes range from private admonishments to public reprimands, suspensions, and disbarment. A public reprimand — the sanction in Calache’s case — is a formal, public acknowledgment of professional misconduct that appears permanently in an attorney’s disciplinary record, accessible to any potential client through the Florida Bar’s attorney search tool. Unlike a suspension, it does not remove the attorney from practice.
Key discipline case files, including those related to this matter, are public record posted to individual attorney profiles on The Florida Bar’s website. For more on the discipline process, see the Florida Bar’s official discipline information page and the overview at Florida Politics covering the January 2026 disciplinary cycle in which Calache’s reprimand was published.
