the Kanes’ motion. There is ample evidence to support the referee’s recommendations that Charles Kane and Harley Kane engaged in serious misconduct. Stewart’s actions and those of Bar counsel do not diminish such evidence. -Moreover, the Bar, in response to the motion, voluntarily excluded both Stewart and its expert witness from any further participation in the case. As a result, Stewart played no role in the referee’s ultimate recommendations as to guilt and sanction. B. Referee’s Findings of Fact and Recommendations as to Guilt We next address the referee’s findings of fact and recommendations as to guilt. We conclude that the referee’s factual findings are fully supported by competent, substantial evidence in the record. See Fla. Bar v. Frederick, 756 So.2d 79, 86 (Fla.2000) (<HOLDING>). We also conclude that the referee’s findings
holding law court will not overturn conclusions supported by competent and substantial evidence holding that the referees findings were supported by competent substantial evidence and thus the court was  precluded from reweighing the evidence and substituting our judgment for that of the referee  quoting fla bar v lange 711 so2d 518 520 n 5 fla1998 holding our court on appeal will reverse a judgment for insufficiency of evidence only if this judgment is not supported by substantial and competent evidence upon the record as a whole and  this rule applies whether the evidence is direct or wholly circumstantial holding that findings of fact are conclusive if supported by clear and convincing competent evidence even where the evidence might support contrary findings holding that the court may not overturn the administrative law judges factual findings as long as they are supported by competent substantial evidence