IN RE AMENDMENTS TO RULE REGULATING THE FLORIDA BAR 10-9.1
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 amended Rule 10-9.1 governing advisory opinions on unlicensed practice of law to clarify that civil suits alleging damages from unlicensed practice may be dismissed without prejudice (removing the requirement for "voluntary" dismissal) pending a determination from the Court on whether the conduct constitutes unlicensed practice under Goldberg v. Merrill Lynch Credit Corp.
The Court amended Rule 10-9.1(c) to remove the requirement that civil suits be "voluntarily" dismissed without prejudice, allowing instead for dismissal without prejudice (voluntary or otherwise) to permit parties to seek a determination from the Court on whether conduct constitutes unlicensed practice.
[1] A civil complaint alleging damages for the unlicensed practice of law must allege that the Florida Supreme Court has ruled the specified conduct constitutes unlicensed pr…
[2] If the Florida Supreme Court has not yet ruled on the conduct at issue, a civil case alleging unlicensed practice of law may be dismissed without prejudice or stayed pend…
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 intelligence“the decision in Goldberg v. Merrill Lynch Credit Corp., 35 So.3d 905 (Fla.2010), requires that a civil complaint alleging a cause of action for damages based on the unlicensed practice of law must allege that this Court has ruled that the specified conduct at issue is the unlicensed or unauthorized practice of law”
Establishes the foundational requirement under Goldberg for civil complaints alleging unlicensed practice
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceThe Court had previously issued an advisory opinion in The Florida Bar Re: Advisory Opinion—Scharrer v. Fundamental Administrative Services clarifying…
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 Unlicensed Practice Of Law cases and more on FLexlaw
The Court, on its own motion, amends Rule 10-9.1 (Procedures for Issuance of Advisory Opinions on the Unlicensed Practice of Law) of the Rules Regulating the Florida Bar (Bar Rules). We have jurisdiction. See art. V, § 15, Fla. Const.
In our opinion in The Florida Bar Re: Advisory Opinion—Scharrer v. Fundamental Administrative Services, No. SC14-1730, 176 So.3d 1273, 2015 WL 6019364 (Fla. Oct. 15, 2015), we clarified that the decision in Goldberg v. Merrill Lynch Credit Corp., 35 So.3d 905 (Fla.2010), requires that a civil complaint alleging a cause of action for damages based on the unlicensed practice of law must allege that this Court has ruled that the specified conduct at issue is the unlicensed or unauthorized practice of law, and that, if this Court has not yet ruled that the actions at issue constitute unlicensed practice, the civil case may be dismissed without prejudice or stayed until the parties can seek such a determination. We also concluded that the language in Bar Rule 10-9.1(c), requiring that a civil suit be. “voluntarily dismissed” without prejudice, is inconsistent with Goldberg.. Accordingly, we hereby amend Rule Regulating the Florida Bar 10-9.1(c) as set forth in the appendix to this opinion, to remove the requirement for a “voluntary” dismissal. ' Deleted text is indicated by struck-through type. The amendment shall become effective immediately upon release of this opinion.
It is so ordered.
LABARGA, C.J., and PARIENTE, LEWIS, QUINCE, POLSTON, and PERRY, JJ., concur.
CANADY, J., concurs in result.
APPENDIX
RULE 10-9.1 PROCEDURES FOR ISSUANCE OF ADVISORY OPINIONS ON THE UNLICENSED PRACTICE OF LAW
(a) — (b) [No Change]
(c) Limitations on Opinions. No opinion shall be rendered with respect to any case or controversy pending in any court or tribunal in this jurisdiction and no informal opinion shall be issued except as provided in rule 10-9.1(g)(1). However, the committee shall issue a formal advisory opinion under circumstances described by the court in Harold Goldberg v. Merrill Lynch Credit Corporation, 35 So.3d 905 (Fla.2010), when the petitioner is a party to a lawsuit and that suit has been stayed or voluntarily dismissed without prejudice.
(d)-(g) [No Change]
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
The Fla. Bar Re: Advisory Opinion, 265 So. 3d 447 (Fla. 2018)
Authorities Cited
- Goldberg v. Merrill Lynch Credit Corp., 35 So. 3d 905 (Fla. 2010)
- The Fla. Bar re Advisory Opinion-Scharrer v. Fundamental Admin. Servs., 176 So. 3d 1273 (Fla. 2015)