STATE OF FLORIDA
v.
J. WALTER KEHOE
AI-generated. These summaries, headnotes, and key points are machine-generated and may contain errors or omissions. Always verify against the full opinion text below. Not legal advice.
The Florida Supreme Court affirmed a disbarment order against attorney J. Walter Kehoe, finding that the charges of withholding client funds and neglecting duties were sustained by the evidence and that the disbarment proceedings were conducted in accordance with the law.
Yes, the charges were sustained, and the disbarment proceedings were regular and in compliance with the law.
“On consideration of the charges (collecting money for clients and with-holding same from them and accepting fees from clients and neglecting to perform the duty he was employed to perform) against him, with supporting evidence, the Circuit Court entered an order of disbarment and a denial of all the rights, privileges, and franchises of an attorney-at-law and as a member of the bar of Florida.”
Describes the charges and the lower court's action.
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceThe State Attorney filed a motion to disbar J. Walter Kehoe based on charges of collecting money for clients and withholding it, and accepting fees wh…
The full statement of facts, procedural history, and disposition for this case are member content.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence© FLexlaw, Inc. — AI-generated enrichments are proprietary. All rights reserved.
Explore caselaw by topic → Browse Attorney Disbarment cases and more on FLexlaw
Pursuant to an order of the Circuit Court of Dade County, the State Attorney filed a motion to disbar J. Walter Kehoe, a practicing attorney, for unprofessional conduct, as authorized *41by Chapter 39, Florida Statutes 1941. On consideration of the charges (collecting money for clients and with-holding same from them and accepting fees from clients and neglecting to perform the duty he was employed to perform) against him, with supporting evidence, the Circuit Court entered an order of disbarment and a denial of all the rights, privileges, and franchises of an attorney-at-law and as a member of the bar of Florida.
The record in the cause has been certified to in this Court, as provided by Rule C governing Circuit Court commissions. The said record has been examined and we find that the charges made against defendant were sustained, that his disbarment in all respects was regular and in compliance with the law. The judgment of the Circuit Court,is, therefore, affirmed.
It is so ordered.
CHAPMAN, C. J., TERRELL, BUFORD and ADAMS, JJ., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Blackburn v. Brorein, 70 So. 2d 293 (Fla. 1954)…th or disqualification. Statutory authority is not necessary to enable a public official to appoint sufficient deputies to perform the duties -of his office. See 43 Am.Jur. 218, 219, Public Officers, § 460. The case of Shad v. De Witt, 158 Fla. 27, 27 So. 2d 517, 520, involved the .Civil Service Law applicable only to Duval ■ County,but it is very similar to the Hillsborough County Act. That case is cited by the .ap-pellees as authority that all similar civil service acts are constitutional and is controlli…1 / 2
-
King Kole, Inc. v. Farris Bryant, 178 So. 2d 2 (Fla. 1965)…on is of wide range and flexibility. Once exercised it will not be disturbed unless the result is plainly unequal, arbitrary or discriminatory. Gray v. Central Florida Lumber Co., 104 Fla. 446, 140 So. 320, 141 So. 604; Shad v. De Witt, 158 Fla. 27, 27 So. 2d 517; Gasson v. Gay, Fla., 49 So. 2d 525, 21 A.L.R.2d 412. However, even if the exemption of other apparel did create an illegal discrimination, it would not relieve the appellants of the tax. We are not here holding that the clothing and apparel exempt…
-
Gen. Dev. Corp. v. Kirk, 251 So. 2d 284 (Fla. 2d DCA 1971)…a. 665, 173 So. 904. . Bryan v. City of Miami, Fla.1951, 56 So. 2d 924 (disputed election to be held simultaneously with city primary election at slight additional cost already incurred when injunction sought). . Shad v. DeWitt, 1946, 158 Fla. 27, 27 So. 2d 517; Hays v. City of Tampa, 1934, 114 Fla. 622, 154 So. 687. . For a general view of the question of standing, see Davis, The Liberalized Law of Standing, 1970, 37 U.Clii.L.Rev. 450; Standing for Review of Actions by Federal Administrative Agencies: A…
Previewing 3 of 5 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence