THE STATE OF FLORIDA EX REL. THE FLORIDA BAR, COMPLAINANT,
v.
HARRY A. TORGE, RESPONDENT
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 approved and adopted a disbarment judgment against an attorney after the attorney failed to petition for review within the allotted time.
Yes, the Florida Supreme Court approved and adopted the disbarment judgment against the respondent attorney.
“Whereas, the judgment of the Board of Governors of the Florida Bar finding the respondent Harry A. Torge guilty of professional misconduct and disbarring him from the practice of law in this State was filed with the Clerk of this Court on the 20th day of March, 1957, and”
Establishes the initial judgment and finding of misconduct by the Board of Governors.
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceThe Board of Governors of the Florida Bar found respondent Harry A. Torge guilty of professional misconduct and disbarred him. The judgment was filed …
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 cases and more on FLexlaw
PER CURIAM.
Whereas, the judgment of the Board of Governors of the Florida Bar finding the respondent Harry A. Torge guilty of professional misconduct and disbarring him from the practice of law in this State was filed with the Clerk of this Court on the 20th day of March, 1957, and
Whereas, more than thirty days now having elapsed since the filing and service on the respondent of such judgment in accordance with the integration rule and no petition for review appearing to have been filed herein, and
Whereas, the Court has examined and considered said judgment and the record supporting the same, it is thereupon,
Ordered that such judgment aforesaid is approved and adopted as the judgment of this Court.
TERRELL, C. J„ and THOMAS, HOBSON, ROBERTS, DREW, THOR-NAL and O’CONNELL, JJ., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Marvel R. Neal v. State of Fla. ex rel. J. A. Neal & Zenia Neal, 135 So. 2d 891 (Fla. 1st DCA 1961)…493. . Bohn v. Rhoades (Fla.1960), 121 So. 2d 777. . State ex rel. Rasco v. Rasco, 139 Fla. 349, 190 So. 510. . Eddy v. Staufer, (1948), 160 Fla. 944, 37 So. 2d 417. . Little v. Franklin (Fla.1949), 40 So. 2d 768. . Dahlke v. Dahlke (Fla.1957), 97 So. 2d 10, 17. . Kellogg-Citizens Nat. Bank of Green Bay, Wis. v. Felton, 145 Fla. 68, 199 So. 50. . Moody v. Branson, 192 Old. 327, 136 P. 2d 925. . 15 Fla.Jur., Habeas Corpus, § 61, pp. 445-146; Mattison et ux. v. State ex rel. Lowe, Fla.App.1958, 107 So…
-
THE Florida BAR v. Griffith, 204 So. 2d 729 (Fla. 1967)…t. It does not agree with the recommendation of discipline in light of the entire record and the respondent’s past disciplinary history. (State ex rel. The Florida Bar v. Griffith, 95 So. 2d 408 [Fla.1957], State ex rel. The Florida Bar v. Griffith, 97 So. 2d 10 [Fla.1957]). Upon consideration, therefore, it is “ORDERED AND ADJUDGED that respondent, William B. Griffith, be suspended from the practice of law for three years and thereafter until such time as he shall show rehabilitation and that he pay the c…