KOVRAK

v.

GINSBURG ET AL., MEMBERS OF THE COMMITTEE ON UNAUTHORIZED PRACTICE OF THE LAW

Citator

Cited By

• State of Fla. ex rel. THE Fla. BAR v. Sperry, 140 So. 2d 587 (Fla. 1962)
  …a citizen of the United States within the meaning of the Fourteenth Amendment to the Constitution of the United States. West Virginia State Bar v. Earley, 109 S.E. 2d 420, supra, Ginsburg v. Kovrak, 1958, 392 Pa. 143, 139 A. 2d 889, appeal dismissed 358 U.S. 52, 79 S.Ct. 95, 3 L.Ed.2d 46. See also Petition of Florida State Bar Association, 186 So. 280, supra. Our conclusion, then, is that the respondent, until and unless he becomes a member of the Bar of this state, should be and is permanently enjoined f…
• In re Russell, 236 So. 2d 767 (Fla. 1970)
  …stitutional standards is utterly devoid of merit. Bar admission rules are matters solely within the province of the States, and the right to practice law in State courts is- not a privilege granted under the Federal Constitution. Kovrak v. Ginsburg, 358 U.S. 52, 79 S.Ct. 95, 3 L.Ed.2d 46 (1958) [dismissing for want of substantial federal question appeal from Supreme Court of Pennsylvania in Bar matter case, Ginsburg v. Kovrak, 392 Pa. 143, 139 A. 2d 889 (1958)]; Starr v. State Board of Law Examiners of Ind…
• Leis v. Flynt, 439 U.S. 438 (U.S. 1979)
  …tution does not require that because a lawyer has been admitted to the bar of one State, he or she must be allowed to practice in another. See Ginsburg v. Kovrak, 392 Pa. 143, 139 A. 2d 889, appeal dismissed for want of substantial federal question, 358 U. S. 52 (1958). Accordingly, because Fahringer and Cambria did not possess a cognizable property interest within the terms of the Fourteenth Amendment, the Constitution does not obligate the Ohio courts to accord them procedural due process in passing on th…

  ← 1 / 2 →