THE FLORIDA BAR RE AMENDMENT TO RULES REGULATING THE FLORIDA BAR (RULE 1-4.3, EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE)
THE FLORIDA BAR RE AMENDMENT TO RULES REGULATING THE FLORIDA BAR (RULE 1-4.3, EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE)
525 So. 2d 868
Florida Supreme Court (1988)
Caution
Cited by 66 cases
Opinion of the Court
PER CURIAM.
The board of governors of the Florida Bar has petitioned the Court to amend rule 1-4.3, Rules Regulating the Florida Bar, to increase the board’s executive committee from seven to nine members. According to the board, the additional members are needed because of the recent increase in the number of seats on the board itself. After considering this petition, we agree to the proposal and amend rule 1-4.3 to read as follows:
1-4.3 Committees. The board of governors shall create an executive committee composed of the president, president-elect, chairman of the budget committee, chairman of the legislation committee, two (2) members of the board appointed by the president, and two (2) three (3) members of the board elected by the board to act upon such matters as arise and require disposition between meetings of the board; a budget committee composed of nine (9) members with three-year staggered terms; grievance committees as provided for in chapter 3; unlicensed practice of law committees as provided for in chapter 10; and a professional ethics committee.
It is so ordered.
McDonald, C.J., and OVERTON, EHRLICH, SHAW, BARKETT, GRIMES and KOGAN, JJ., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By (63 total)
-
Rupert B. Brown v. The Est. OF A.P. Stuckey, Sr., 749 So. 2d 490 (Fla. 1999)…la.1959), and our subsequent decisions in Castlewood International Corp. v. La-Fleur, 322 So. 2d 520 (Fla.1975); Wackenhut Corp. v. Canty, 359 So. 2d 430 (Fla.1978); Baptist Memorial Hospital, Inc. v. Bell, 384 So. 2d 145 (Fla.1980); Smith v. Brown, 525 So. 2d 868 (Fla.1988); and E.R. Squibb & Sons, Inc. v. Farnes, 697 So. 2d 825 (Fla.1997). We have jurisdiction. Art. V, § 3(b)(3), Fla. Const. For the reasons expressed, we conclude that the district court in this case erred in reversing the trial judge’s orde…1 / 3
-
Denis Rety v. Green, 546 So. 2d 410 (Fla. 3d DCA 1989)…rmination necessarily requires the trial judge to “consider the credibility of the witnesses along with the weight of all of the other evidence” and to enter such order “when the manifest weight of the evidence dictates such action.” Smith v. Brown, 525 So. 2d 868, 870 (Fla.1988). “Although an order of new trial need not incant language to the effect that the verdict is against the manifest weight of the evidence or was influenced by considerations outside the record, the order must give reasons which will su…
-
E.R. Squibb & Sons, Inc. v. Boyd B. Farnes, 697 So. 2d 825 (Fla. 1997)…WELLS, Judge, dissenting. I dissent because the Third District’s revised opinion does not conflict with Smith v. Brown, 525 So. 2d 868 (Fla.1988). I also dissent because the majority’s decision makes the judge a super-juror in violation of the respondent’s guaranteed right to a trial by jury.…1 / 3
Previewing 3 of 63 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence