IN RE THE FLORIDA BAR. IN RE PETITION TO AMEND THE INTEGRATION RULE, ARTICLE II (LAW FACULTY AFFILIATES)
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 Court grants The Florida Bar's petition to amend the Integration Rule and Bylaws to create a new category of 'law faculty affiliates'.
[1] The Florida Bar may amend its Integration Rule and Bylaws through a petition process to the Court.
[2] Full-time law school faculty members admitted to practice in another state may become "law faculty affiliates" of The Florida Bar.
Previewing 2 of 5 headnotes on this case. FLexlaw’s editorially structured points of law — every proposition, pinpointed — are reserved for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceThe Florida Bar petitioned the Court to amend its Integration Rule and Bylaws to create a new membership category for law school faculty. The proposed…
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 Integration Rule Of The Florida Bar cases and more on FLexlaw
PER CURIAM.
This proceeding is before the Court on the petition of The Florida Bar for amendment of the Integration Rule and Bylaws. We have reviewed the proposed amendments and the Bar’s petition in support of them. We grant the petition by adopting the following additions to the Integration Rule and Bylaws.
Article II of the Integration Rule is amended by the addition of the following new paragraph:
8. Full-time faculty members in the employment of law schools in Florida approved by the American Bar Association, who are admitted to practice and are in good standing before a court of any state, may become “law faculty affiliates” of The Florida Bar. Law faculty affiliates may participate in such activities of The Florida Bar as may be specified in the Bylaws, but shall not be entitled to engage in the practice of law, appear as attorneys before the courts of the state, or hold themselves out as possessing such entitlements.
Article II of the Bylaws under the Integration Rule is amended by the addition of the following new section:
§ 6. Law Faculty Affiliates. Every law faculty affiliate of The Florida Bar under the provisions of article II, section 8 of the Integration Rule shall pay fees as set by the Board of Governors, shall be entitled to receive The Florida Bar Journal and The Florida Bar News, and shall have such other privileges and benefits of members of The Florida Bar as the Board of Governors shall authorize. The executive director shall issue to law faculty affiliates such special identification card as may be authorized by the Board of Governors.
In support of the amendment the Bar’s petition states that the new category of “affiliates” allowing law faculty limited participation in Bar activities “would allow the Bar to benefit from a valuable source of talent and energy.”
This amendment, creating the above new provisions of the Integration Rule and Bylaws, will take effect on January 1, 1983. It is so ordered.
ALDERMAN, C.J., and ADKINS, BOYD, OVERTON, MCDONALD and EHRLICH, JJ., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Gonzalez v. State, 440 So. 2d 514 (Fla. 4th DCA 1983)…ion on the other count. [*516] Several Florida cases have acknowledged the Mahaun rule but have refused to vacate allegedly inconsistent verdicts. Pitts v. State, 425 So. 2d 542 (Fla.1983); McCray v. State, 397 So. 2d 1229 (Fla. 3d DCA 1981), aff’d, 425 So. 2d 1 (Fla.1983); Marshall v. State, 421 So. 2d 714 (Fla. 3d DCA 1982). In each of these cases, an attempt was made to reconcile verdicts which convicted the defendants of the possession of firearms during the commission of felonies while acquitting them…
-
Castillo v. State, 590 So. 2d 458 (Fla. 3d DCA 1991)…e indicates that there was an acquittal on the charge of aggravated battery, but the case was not submitted to the jury on the charge of attempted aggravated battery. Id.; see McCray v. State, 397 So. 2d 1229, 1230 n. 3 (Fla. 3d DCA 1981), approved, 425 So. 2d 1 (Fla.1983). The supreme court reasoned that because the evidence would have supported a finding of attempted aggravated battery, and because the charge under section 790.07 could be sustained where the jury found that there was unlawful possession o…
-
McKEE v. State, 450 So. 2d 563 (Fla. 3d DCA 1984)…fendant not only failed to object to defective verdict form at trial, but also agreed to its submission, any error was invited). As was most aptly stated by Judge Schwartz in McCray v. State, 397 So. 2d 1229, 1231, n. 4 (Fla. 3d DCA 1981), approved, 425 So. 2d 1 (Fla.1983): Moreover, we confess to a certain satisfaction in applying this presumption [that the jury acted in accordance with the law] to McCray, whose argument basically is, after all, that because the jury charitably gave him the appetizer and…
Previewing 3 of 10 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence