GIBSON

v.

FLORIDA BAR ET AL.

Citator

Cited By

• Alper v. THE Florida BAR, 771 So. 2d 523 (Fla. 2000)
  …, 581 So. 2d at 1298-99 (noting how rule 2-9.3 comports with due process); Gibson v. Florida Bar, 906 F. 2d 624 (11th Cir.1990) (holding that rule 2-9.3 properly considers and protects dissenting bar members’ constitutional rights), cert. dismissed, 502 U.S. 104, 112 S.Ct. 633, 116 L.Ed.2d 432 (1991). Therefore, because we hold that the Bar’s activities, as alleged in the petition before us, are clearly within the parameters previously approved by this Court, we hereby deny the petition on the basis that i…
• United States v. Williams, 504 U.S. 36 (U.S. 1992)
  …writ as improvidently granted over the dissent of four Justices). We have frequently dismissed the writ as improvidently granted after the case has been briefed and argued; in fact, we have already done so twice this Term. See Gibson v. Florida Bar, 502 U. S. 104 (1991); PFZ Properties, Inc. v. Rodriguez, 503 U. S. 267 (1992). Although we do not always explain the reason for the dismissal, we have on occasion dismissed the writ for the reasons raised by the respondent in the brief in opposition. Thus, nothin…
• Gabe Kaimowitz v. THE Florida BAR, 996 F.2d 1151 (11th Cir. 1993)
  …case was decided. In Gibson v. The Florida Bar, the Eleventh Circuit applied Keller to the procedures adopted by the Florida Bar for resolving challenges to the payment of dues by its members. 906 F. 2d 624 (11th Cir.1990), cert. denied, — U.S. -, 112 S.Ct. 633, 116 L.Ed.2d 432 (1991). Chief Judge Tjoflat, writing for the majority of the panel, carefully examined the Florida Bar’s procedures and found that they satisfy the requirements of the Constitution and applicable case law. Gibson therefore control…