IN RE RULES RELATING TO ADMISSIONS TO THE FLORIDA BAR
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 its rules to allow the widow or next of kin of an applicant who dies after passing the bar exam but before admission to receive a certificate and a refund of examination fees. This rule applies retroactively to the August 1959 examination and subsequent ones.
Yes, the rules should be amended. The court held that the widow or next of kin of an applicant who passes the examination but dies before admission is entitled to a certificate recognizing their successful completion and a refund of examination fees.
“If any applicant for admission passes the examination but dies before he takes the oath of admission and receives his certificate, his widow, if living, and, if not living, his next of kin shall receive an appropriate certificate of this Court certifying that said applicant had successfully passed the examination and otherwise met the requirements for admission and, had it not been for his death, would have been duly admitted as a member of the Florida Bar; in addition thereto, such person or persons shall be entitled to receive a refund of the amount of money paid to the Board under the schedule of fees fixed by the regulations of the said Board for taking said examination.”
This quote details the new rule allowing posthumous certification and fee refunds for applicants who die after passing the bar exam but before admission.
Previewing 1 of 2 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceAn applicant successfully passed the bar examination administered by the Board of Bar Examiners. However, the applicant died before taking the oath of…
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 Admission To The Bar cases and more on FLexlaw
Article III of the Rules of the Supreme Court of Florida Relating to Admissions to the Bar, effective November 1, be and the same is hereby amended by adding a new section thereto to be known as section 19 (a) to read as follows, viz.:
“If any applicant for admission passes the examination but dies before he takes the oath of admission and receives his certificate, his widow, if liv*413ing, and, if not living, his next of kin shall receive an appropriate certificate of this Court certifying that said applicant had successfully passed the examination and otherwise met the requirements for admission and, had it not been for his death, would have been duly admitted as a member of the Florida Bar; in addition thereto, such person or persons shall be entitled to receive a refund of the amount of money paid to the Board under the schedule of fees fixed by the regulations of the said Board for taking said examination.
“This rule shall apply to all applicants taking the August, 1959 and subsequent examinations.”
THOMAS, C. J., and TERRELL, HOB-SON, ROBERTS, DREW, THORNAL and O’CONNELL, JJ., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Renbur Drugs, Inc. v. Fla. Bd. OF Pharmacy, 251 So. 2d 294 (Fla. 3d DCA 1971)…ted by the automatic stay and the party acting under such circumstances should be required to return the proceedings to the status quo pending review by the Supreme Court of Florida of the petition for cer-tiorari. Compare Badami v. State, Fla.1959, 115 So. 2d 412. Otherwise, in many instances, relief which might be accorded by the Supreme Court would become moot. Therefore, I would entertain the motion for constitutional stay and enter an order returning these parties to the status quo that they occupied du…
-
Casseus v. State, 509 So. 2d 965 (Fla. 3d DCA 1987)…he state had appealed the decision of this court reported as Casseus v. State, 508 So. 2d 1251 (Fla. 3d DCA 1987), to the supreme court, the trial court was without jurisdiction to enter a second order denying the relief sought. See Bedami v. State, 115 So. 2d 412 (Fla.1959); Lee v. State, 392 So. 2d 913 (Fla. 1st DCA 1980); Wells v. State, 362 So. 2d 441 (Fla. 4th DCA 1978); Gobie v. State, 188 So. 2d 34 (Fla. 3d DCA), appeal dismissed, 192 So. 2d 485 (Fla.1966). Second, this court had granted the state’s mo…