IN RE PETITION OF DAVID KRUEGER FOR ADMISSION TO THE FLORIDA BAR
This cause came on to be heard upon the petition of David Krueger, an applicant for admission to The Florida Bar, that this Court re-examine his examination papers produced by him at the March and August, 1961 examination conducted by the Florida Board of Bar Examiners for the purpose of evaluating them as to “breadth and scope” and “depth and understanding” and to independently find that petitioner is worthy and well qualified to be admitted to The Florida Bar and to order his admission thereto, and the reply of the Florida Board of Bar Examiners to said petition, and the Court having carefully considered the same, it is
Ordered that said petition be and the same is hereby denied.
ROBERTS, C. J., and TERRELL, THOMAS, HOBSON, DREW, THOR-NAL and O’CONNELL, JJ., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By (26 total)
-
Frye v. Frye, 385 So. 2d 1383 (Fla. 2d DCA 1980)…habilitative alimony. Six supreme court cases have touched on the question. Carlton v. Carlton, 87 Fla. 460, 100 So. 745 (1924); Vance v. Vance, 143 Fla. 513, 197 So. 128 (1940); Friedman v. Schneider, 52 So. 2d 420 (Fla.1951); Chaachou v. Chaachou, 135 So. 2d 206 (Fla.1961); In re Estate of Freeland, 182 So. 2d 425 (Fla.1965); Canakaris v. Canakaris, 382 So. 2d 1197 (Fla.1980). However, only Carlton and Fried [*1386] man can be said to have directly confronted the issue of termination of alimony upon the rec…
-
Advanced Chiropractic & Rehab. Ctr. v. United Auto. Ins. Co., 103 So. 3d 866 (Fla. 4th DCA 2012)…0.104(1), Fla. Stat. (2010); State v. Calvert, 15 So. 3d 946, 948 (Fla. 4th DCA 2009). As a general rule, “[a]n error not raised in the brief is waived.” Ramos v. Philip Morris Cos., 743 So. 2d 24, 29 (Fla. 3d DCA 1999) (citing Chaachou v. Chaachou, 135 So. 2d 206, 221 (Fla.1961); Lesperance v. Lesperance, 257 So. 2d 66, 67 (Fla. 3d DCA 1971)). Here, United waived the evidentiary deficiencies relied upon by the circuit court to reverse by not raising objections at the hearing on the rule 1.540 motion. Also, U…
-
Lesperance v. Lesperance, 257 So. 2d 66 (Fla. 3d DCA 1971)…his was done by joint order filed in both causes. A notice of appeal was filed in the companion cases and the only point urged for reversal in the appellant’s brief [and therefore the only point preserved for review, Chaachou v. Chaachou, Fla.1961, 135 So. 2d 206; Weisman v. Weisman, Fla.App. 1962, 141 So. 2d 622; Central Bank and Trust Company v. Banner Trading Co., Fla.App.1963, 157 So. 2d 201; Rule 3.7, subd. i, Florida Appellate Rules] 32 F.S.A. was the failure of the trial court to grant the motion to v…
Previewing 3 of 26 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence