THE FLORIDA BAR, COMPLAINANT,
v.
DINTY WARMINGTON WHITING, RESPONDENT

Fla. | 1963-10-23
No. 32913
DREW, C. J., and ROBERTS, THORN-AL, O’CONNELL and CALDWELL, JJ., concur.
157 So. 2d 77 Florida Supreme Court (1963) Positive Treatment
Cited by 2 cases

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.

Synopsis

The Florida Supreme Court reviewed a Board of Governors disciplinary decision and affirmed the disbarring of attorney Dinty Warmington Whiting, who had been convicted of federal mail fraud felonies. The Court adopted the Board's finding that conviction of a felony in a court of competent jurisdiction warrants disbarment from the practice of law in Florida.


Holding

The Court affirmed the Board of Governors' judgment that respondent should be disbarred from the practice of law in Florida based on his conviction of felonies in a court of competent jurisdiction.


Key Quotes

“found respondent to have been convicted of a felony in a court of competent jurisdiction and directed that he be disbarred from the practice of law in Florida”

The Board of Governors' finding and directive that formed the basis for the disbarment decision

Previewing 1 of 2 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.

Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence

Facts & Procedural History

Respondent Dinty Warmington Whiting was a member of The Florida Bar. He was convicted of violations of Title 18 United States Code, Section 1343 and 2…

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.


Opinion of the Court
PER CURIAM.

PER CURIAM.

The judgment of the Board of Governors •of The Florida Bar entered August 12, 1963, m this disciplinary proceeding and filed m this court August 19, 1963, with the record and evidence and all proceedings had herein, came on to be reviewed by this court.

The report of the Board of Governors finds that respondent, Dinty Warmington Whiting, is a member of The Florida Bar, subject to the disciplinary provisions of Article NI, Integration Rule of The Florida Bar, as adopted by the Supreme Court of Florida on March 4, 1950 and subsequently amended, 31 F.S.A.

The record shows that respondent was charged with and convicted of certain violations of Title 18 United States Code, Sec. 1343 and 2, felonies under the laws of the United States. Petition for certiorari to review the conviction was denied by the Supreme Court of the United States on February 18, 1963. Thereafter, Notice to Show Cause why disciplinary judgment should not be entered against him was served upon respondent on April 11, 1963. No response to the Notice to Show Cause was filed and upon consideration the Board of Governors of The Florida Bar found respondent to have been convicted of a felony in a court of competent jurisdiction and directed that he be disbarred from the practice of law in Florida.

The record and judgment of the Board of Governors of The Florida Bar have been examined by this court. It is accordingly ordered and adjudged that the judgment of the Board of Governors of The Florida Bar, dated August 12, 1963, that respondent, Dinty Warmington Whiting, is guilty as charged and that he be disbarred from the practice of law in Florida, be, and the same is approved and adopted as the judgment of this court. Execution is hereby directed to issue for the costs assessed against respondent.

DREW, C. J., and ROBERTS, THORN-AL, O’CONNELL and CALDWELL, JJ., concur.


Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus


Citator

Cited By

  • THE Florida BAR v. Fussell, 179 So. 2d 852 (Fla. 1965)
    …s. This statement is 'substantially correct. State ex rel. Florida Bar v. Jackman, Fla., 145 So. 2d 482; State ex rel. Florida Bar v. Lewis, Fla., 145 So. 2d 876; State ex rel. Florida Bar v. West, Fla., 149 So. 2d 557; Florida Bar v. Whiting, Fla., 157 So. 2d 77; The Florida Bar v. Scott, Fla., 165 So. 2d 167, and The Florida Bar v. Glaser, Fla. 172 So. 2d 230. In five of the cases above-eited, no review was sought and, indeed, no response was filed by the accused lawyer. In Lewis, the only relief sought in…

Full citator, related cases, and AI research tools

Open in FLexlaw