Furman’s misconduct went far beyond merely practicing law without a license. As noted by the Supreme Court of Florida, the uncontradicted testimony of her former customers was that she encouraged them to falsify information in marriage dissolution papers and to conceal relevant information. Her purported reasons were various: it’s none of their damn business, they don’t pay attention to the information, or you’ll (either) get less or give more money in the dissolution judgment. In one instance, she advised a wife who had been married, divorced, and remarried to the same husband but could not remember the date of the remarriage to insert the date of the dissolved first marriage as the date of the second marriage in the petition for dissolution. Another couple who disagreed on whether their stipulation on child support provided for $35 per week or $35 per child was advised that it didn’t matter because the judge awarded whatever he wanted to anyway. In a particularly egregious instance, she assisted a husband seeking a marriage dissolution in preparing a stipulation in which he agreed to child custody by the wife. While the dissolution petition and child custody stipulation were pending before the court, the husband became aware that the wife was abusing the children, took actual custody of the children, and consulted Furman about withdrawing his stipulated agreement on child custody. Furman advised him not to do so because this would require “starting over” on the dissolution petition and he should let the social agency handle the child abuse and custody problem.