THE FLORIDA BAR, COMPLAINANT,
v.
JOE D. KINSEY, RESPONDENT
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 reinstated Joe D. Kinsey to the practice of law after he was found guilty of some disciplinary charges but had already served a lengthy suspension due to a prior adjudication of incompetence. Kinsey waived his right to appeal the Board of Governors' decision.
Yes, Joe D. Kinsey should be reinstated to the practice of law.
“Because of the length of time in which respondent had been suspended from the practice of law following his being adjudicated incompetent the Board found that no further disciplinary action was indicated.”
This quote explains the Board of Governors' reasoning for not imposing further discipline.
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceJoe D. Kinsey faced disciplinary charges from The Florida Bar. Following a previous opinion, the Board of Governors found him guilty of four charges b…
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 Reinstatement To Practice Of Law cases and more on FLexlaw
Following our opinion in this cause reported as Kinsey v. The Florida Bar, Fla. 1967, 195 So.2d 210, the Board of Governors entered its judgment finding the respondent guilty of four of the charges made against him and not guilty as to all others. Because of the length of time in which respondent had been suspended from the practice of law following his being adjudicated incompetent the Board found that no further disciplinary action was indicated. It recommended that respondent, Joe D. Kinsey, be reinstated to active membership in The Florida Bar.
The respondent has filed a “Waiver of Right to Appeal” and acceptance of the judgment of the Board of Governors.
After consideration of the entire record it is our opinion that the judgment of the Board of Governors should be accepted and that respondent, Joe D. Kinsey, should be reinstated in the practice of law.
It is so ordered.
THORNAL, C. J., and THOMAS, ROBERTS, DREW and O’CONNELL, JJ., concur.