IN RE RULES OF THE SUPREME COURT OF FLORIDA RELATING TO ADMISSION TO THE FLORIDA BAR

Fla. | 1960-11-23
THOMAS, C. J., and TERRELL, HOB-SON, ROBERTS, DREW, THORNAL and O’CONNELL, JJ., concur.
124 So. 2d 706 Florida Supreme Court (1960) Caution
Cited by 2 cases

Opinion of the Court
PER CURIAM.

PER CURIAM.

Subparagraph a of Section 22 of Article IV of the foregoing rules, 31 F.S.A. be and the same is hereby amended by inserting immediately following the words “in-residence college work” in the third line of the printed rule the words “or its equivalent” and adding to said Section 22a at the end thereof the following sentence: “This section shall be applicable only to those applying for admission to the Bar who enroll in any accredited Law College subsequent to December 31, 1960. All other applicants shall be governed by previous Section 22a of Article IV of the rules aforesaid.”

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

  • City OF Miami Beach v. Schiffman, 144 So. 2d 799 (Fla. 1962)
    …owever, it must be admitted that the above language is misleading, standing alone, for in that case there had been an award benefiting the claimant. This Court set aside an award of attorneys’ fees in Southeastern Telephone Co. v. Blount, Fla.1960, 124 So. 2d 706, where there had been no award of other benefits made to the claimant. However, it is patent that the reason therefor was the fact there had been no claim filed. It is interesting to note, as revealed by the record on file with this Court, that the…

Full citator, related cases, and AI research tools

Open in FLexlaw