green
Positive treatment
Quoted verbatim 1×
13.2 score
“under the constitutional provision , a person must be a member of the bar for five years at the time he or she takes office, not at the time of qualifying.”
Top citers, strongest first. 5 distinct citers.
How cited ↗
discussed
Cited as authority (quoted)
Miller v. Mendez
(2×)
also: Cited as authority (rule)
under the constitutional provision , a person must be a member of the bar for five years at the time he or she takes office, not at the time of qualifying.
discussed
Cited as authority (rule)
Representative Geraldine F. Thompson, etc. v. Governor Ron DeSantis
(2×)
In Miller v. Mendez, 804 So. 2d 1243, 1245 (Fla. 2001), this Court held “that a candidate for judicial office must be a resident of the territorial jurisdiction of the court at the time he or she assumes office,” disapproving the conclusion “that the residence requirement refers to residence at the time of qualifying or taking the oath of candidate.” Further, in In re Advisory Opinion to the Governor, 192 So. 2d 757, 759 (Fla. 1966), this Court stated that the bar membership eligibility requirement “refer[s] to eligibility at the time of assuming office and not at the - 26 - time of …
cited
Cited as authority (rule)
Newman v. State
See id.; In re Advisory Opinion to the Governor, 192 So.2d 757, 759 (Fla.1966).
cited
Cited "see"
Advisory Opinion to the Governor Re Commission of Elected Judge
See In re Advisory Op. to Gov., 192 So.2d 757, 759 (Fla.1966).
discussed
Cited "see"
Citizens for Term Limits & Accountability, Inc. v. Lyons
See generally Advisory Opinion to the Governor, 192 So.2d 757, 759 (Fla. 1966) (ruling judicial candidate ineligible for office to which he had been elected where additional qualifications were imposed by an "amendment to Article V of the Constitution ... [that] was adopted by the people and became effective simultaneously with the election by the people of the Honorable Stephen R.
Retrieving the full opinion text from the archive…
THE FLORIDA BAR
v.
S. J. Kenneth ROGERS
v.
S. J. Kenneth ROGERS
Peter J. T. Taylor, Tampa, for The Florida Bar, complainant., S. J. Kenneth Rogers, Tampa, in pro. per.
Drew, Ervin, Roberts, Thomas, Thornal.
Published
Citer courts: District Court of Appeal of Fl… (1)
PER CURIAM.
This case is before the Court for review of the judgment entered by the Board of Governors of The Florida Bar on October 4, 1966.
Said judgment reads in part:
“The complaint charged respondent with two counts of embezzlement of trust funds. The respondent has admitted his guilt of said charges. The referee found respondent guilty of said charges. The referee found respondent guilty as charged and recommended disbarment. This Board finds no mitigating circumstances and no attempt by respondent to make restitution to his clients. It concurs in the findings and recommendations of its referee. Accordingly, it is
“ORDERED AND ADJUDGED that the respondent, S. J. Kenneth Rogers, be disbarred and that he pay the costs of these proceedings in the amount of $223.-10.”
No request for hearing before us has been submitted by Respondent.
The record and judgment of the Board of Governors of The Florida Bar have been examined by this Court. It is ordered that the judgment of said Board that Respondent S. J. Kenneth Rogers 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 against Respondent.
THORNAL, C. J., and THOMAS, ROBERTS, DREW and ERVIN, JJ., concur.