A Florida-admitted attorney lost his law license in three jurisdictions — New Hampshire, Massachusetts, and Florida — after being found to have misappropriated nearly $100,000 in client settlement funds, lied to disciplinary investigators, and defied court orders.
WHO IS ROBERT MICHAEL FOJO?
Robert Michael Fojo is a former attorney who was admitted to The Florida Bar in 2005 and had practiced law in New Hampshire since 2010. Based in Nashua, NH, Fojo built a practice combining personal injury litigation with high-profile advocacy against COVID-era school mask mandates and pandemic-related government orders. At his peak, he was among the most prominent anti-mandate litigators in the Northeast, filing lawsuits against numerous New Hampshire and Massachusetts school districts. None of those lawsuits ultimately succeeded.
His disciplinary record prior to 2021 includes one notable flag: at the time of his New Hampshire suspension, his Florida law license had already been suspended for failure to pay Bar dues — an administrative matter unrelated to the misconduct that would eventually cost him his licenses in all three states.
HOW IT STARTED: NEW HAMPSHIRE’S INVESTIGATION
The events that ended Fojo’s legal career began with a single client complaint filed with New Hampshire’s Attorney Discipline Office (ADO) in mid-2021. A client alleged she had never received her settlement money from a personal injury case Fojo settled in early December 2020. What started as an inquiry into one unpaid settlement quickly expanded into a multi-client investigation with far more serious findings.
Fojo initially acknowledged what he called bookkeeping errors, provided documents to the ADO, met with investigators twice, and prepared a spreadsheet to reconcile his trust account. But when the ADO subpoenaed records from Fojo’s IOLTA account — the special bank account attorneys are required to use to hold client funds separately from their own — what they found went far beyond paperwork mistakes.
On December 17, 2021, the ADO filed a 33-page complaint outlining alleged mismanagement of funds across three clients. Four days later, on December 21, the New Hampshire Supreme Court issued an emergency suspension of Fojo’s license, finding it necessary to protect the public and preserve the integrity of the legal profession.
THE CLIENT FUNDS AT ISSUE
Three separate client matters totaling nearly $100,000 were at the center of the misconduct allegations:
- Slip-and-Fall Personal Injury Settlement — Client received a $50,000 settlement. Fojo failed to properly hold the funds in his IOLTA trust account and still owed the client $14,600 when the investigation began. This client’s complaint triggered the broader ADO inquiry.
- Second Personal Injury Matter — A separate client whose funds from a personal injury case were misappropriated by Fojo to satisfy obligations to other clients. Approximately $33,350 at issue.
- Employment Dispute Settlement — A contract dispute that led to a $500,000 settlement. The ADO found mishandling of approximately $50,020 in client funds held in trust, alleging Fojo used money allocated for one client to pay taxes following a settlement for a different client.
Total alleged misappropriation: approximately $98,036.
ADO FINDINGS: “ROBBING PETER TO PAY PAUL”
At a January 4, 2022 hearing before specially appointed Superior Court Judge Larry Smukler, Fojo’s attorney argued that any financial errors were due to an inexperienced office assistant and new accounting software. The ADO rejected that framing entirely, characterizing the conduct as “robbing Peter to pay Paul” — using funds belonging to one client to make payments owed to another.
Retired Judge Smukler wrote in his referee report: “Simply put, Fojo’s conduct is not the conduct of an attorney who has made unintentional bookkeeping errors and who has earnestly sought to prevent harm to his clients by correcting those errors.”
The New Hampshire Supreme Court issued a unanimous eight-page ruling in February 2022 in which Chief Justice Gordon MacDonald wrote: “This case involves a series of lies to clients and the ADO and ongoing misuse and misappropriation of client funds.”
The court also noted that the day after it issued its suspension order prohibiting Fojo from touching client funds, Fojo allegedly moved money out of an account — a direct defiance of the court’s order.
MULTI-STATE RECIPROCAL DISCIPLINE
Because Fojo was admitted to practice in multiple jurisdictions, the New Hampshire proceedings triggered reciprocal discipline actions in both Massachusetts and Florida:
- New Hampshire: Disciplinary resignation following the investigation and emergency suspension.
- Massachusetts: The Supreme Judicial Court issued a reciprocal order on October 18, 2022, striking Fojo from the roll of attorneys authorized to practice in that state.
- Florida: The Florida Bar initiated Case No. SC2024-0622. A Florida referee initially recommended only a three-year suspension, finding disbarment too harsh. The Florida Bar challenged that recommendation. The Florida Supreme Court sided with the Bar, noting it is free to impose a more severe punishment than a sister state’s sanction in reciprocal discipline proceedings.
THE FLORIDA DISBARMENT ORDER (NOVEMBER 2025)
The Florida Supreme Court’s disbarment order was issued November 26, 2025, and became effective approximately December 26, 2025 — 30 days later. The court cited Florida Standards for Imposing Lawyer Sanctions, under which disbarment is the presumptively appropriate sanction when a lawyer intentionally misappropriates client funds.
The action was confirmed in The Florida Bar’s January 1, 2026 Disciplinary Actions report. Fojo is one of two attorneys disbarred in that reporting cycle. The U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Florida also issued a parallel federal disbarment order reflecting reciprocal federal discipline procedures.
FLORIDA BAR RULES VIOLATED
Rule 4-1.15 — Safekeeping Property: Requires attorneys to promptly deliver client funds and hold them in a trust account separate from the attorney’s own property. Fojo’s failure to maintain adequate trust account balances — and his use of one client’s funds to pay another — is a textbook violation.
Rule 4-8.4 — Misconduct: Prohibits conduct involving dishonesty, fraud, deceit, or misrepresentation. The NH Supreme Court’s finding that Fojo lied to clients and to ADO investigators implicates this rule directly.
Rule 4-1.3 — Diligence: Requires attorneys to act with reasonable diligence and promptness. Fojo’s failure to distribute settlement funds owed to clients — in one case leaving a client unpaid for over a year — reflects a sustained failure of this obligation.
Rule 4-1.4 — Communication: Requires attorneys to keep clients reasonably informed about case status. Fojo engaged in inconsistent and inadequate communication with clients regarding funds that were rightfully theirs.
CAN FOJO EVER PRACTICE LAW AGAIN?
Under Florida Bar rules, disbarred lawyers may not re-apply for admission for five years. After that waiting period, they must complete a rigorous process including a background check and retaking the bar exam. Given the intentional nature of the misappropriation, the repeated lies to investigators, and the direct defiance of a court order — the most serious categories of professional misconduct — reinstatement would face extraordinary obstacles.
