Opposition Brief — In re Crowne

LIBRARY | . Supreme Court, U.S.

SUPREME CourT, u.s | > FL =?

> OCT 15 If

RICEREL RS!

IN THE ——

SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES

October Term, 1972

No. 73-19

In the Matter of the Application of

JULIUS P. CROWNE

For Admission to the Bar Examination of Florida

PETITION FOR WRIT OF CERTIORARI TO

THE SUPREME COURT OF FLORIDA

BRIEF FOR THE FLORIDA BOARD OF BAR

EXAMINERS IN OPPOSITION

C. GRAHAM CAROTHERS

Attorney for Board

P. O. Box 391

Tallahassee, Florida, 32302

INDEX

Page

OPINIONS BELOW ..........:csseeeeeees sevestied’ 4

SRUNNGIIIIO 6 since sn deho> access cokstcantds jnbsinl te

QUESTIONS PRESENTED FOR REVIEW ......... 2

STATEMENT OF THE CASE ..........0c0seeee0- 3

REASONS FOR DENYING THE WRIT ............ 6

GS 0 kc dv dccicesdccecpescccstubedaes esowo®

APPENDIX

A—Section 22(a), (b) and (c), Article IV,

Rules of the Supreme Court of Florida

Relating to Admissions to the Bar ............... 11

B—Letter of Transmittal and Instructions

for Preparing Abstract of Practice .............+. 15

C—Petitioner’s Memorandum Relating to

Aieeaeh GE THER: 3s knw cevcaccisdivcscvecnses 19

D—Petition to the Supreme Court of

DE ceciecndptledsendidesel<caxadeceretie 20

E—Section B of Application to the Florida

Board of Bar Examiners ..............--+se00.- 22

F—Rules Governing Florida Bar Examinations

AO GTN « kc scnvesibvetescsssedvecsosse 26

ti

TABLE OF CASES CITED

American Commuters Association v. Levitt,

279 F.Supp. 40 at 48 (S.D. New York 1967) ......... _&

Brooks v. Laws, |

208 Fed. 18 ( Dist. of Col. 1953) .................... 7

Schware v. Board of Bar Examiners,

$55 U.S. 232, L.Ed.2d 796, 77 S.Ct. 752

5) SRR Ry SS. eRe BS aS 8 Oe eee ee 6

Toomer v. Witsell

$34 U.S. 385 at 398, 399 (1947) .................4.. 7

CONSTITUTIONAL, STATUTORY, and

REGULATORY PROVISIONS

Section 22(a), Article IV, Rules of the Supreme

Court of Florida Relating to Admissions to

NE 555% Haas Sewer ea os coo ce ete okies ccwee 3, 9, ll

Section 22(b), Article IV, Rules of the Supreme

Court of Florida Relating to Admissions to

5 FEAR Re, EET SAR 3, 9, 12

Section 22(c), Article IV, Rules of the Supreme

Court of Florida Relating to Admissions to

SSE 2 ca seee pease bb esege se teh 3, 4, 5, 8, 9, 13

IN THE

SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES

October Term, 1972

No. 73-19

In the Matter of the Application of

JULIUS P. CROWNE

For Admission to the Bar Examination of Florida

PETITION FOR WRIT OF CERTIORARI TO

THE SUPREME COURT OF FLORIDA

BRIEF FOR THE FLORIDA BOARD OF BAR

EXAMINERS IN OPPOSITION

OPINIONS BELOW

The order of the Supreme Court of Florida filed April 4,

1978 denying Petitioner's application for an order allowing him

“2

to sit for Florida’s Spring, 1973 bar examination, without

prejudice to Petitioner to reapply and supply the Florida

Board of Bar Examiners with reasonably accurate details and

appropriate documentation of the extent of his legal practice

is found at Appendix, Pages Al-A5 of the Petition. The order

of the Supreme Court of Florida denying rehearing was filed

May 7, 1978 and is found at Appendix, Page A-10 of the peti-

tion.

JURISDICTION

The order sought to be reviewed was entered on April 4,

1978. Petitioner sought a rehearing which was denied on May

7, 1973. The Petitioner seeks to invoke the jurisdiction of this

Court under 28 U.S.C. Section 1257(3).

QUESTIONS PRESENTED FOR REVIEW

1. Whether a State may deny an applicant the right to take

the bar examination when the applicant fails to meet ordinary

legal academic standards prescribed by that state.

2. Whether an applicant who is denied admission to the

bar examination because he failed to meet legal academic

requirements is entitled to a hearing before such denial is

made.

3. Whether it is constitutionally permissible to charge out-

of-state, licensed attorneys a higher application fee to take the

Florida Bar Examination than is charged other out-of-state

applicants. _

ee

3

STATEMENT OF THE CASE

On October 5, 1972, Petitioner applied for admission to

Florida’s Spring, 1973 bar examination scheduled for July

24-25, 1978. Section 22(a), Article IV, Rules of the Supreme

Court of Florida Relating to Admissions to the Bar (hereinafter

“Rules” ), requires three years’ in-residence work at an accred-

ited undergraduate college or university, or its equivalent

(Appendix A, p. 11) Section 22(b), Article IV of the Rules

requires applicants to be graduates of a full-time accredited

law school (Appendix A, p. 12) The term “accredited law

school” was defined by such rule to refer to any law school

approved or provisionally approved by the American Bar

Association or which is a member of the Association of Ameri-

can Law Schools. The Petitioner could not meet the require-

ment of Section 22(b) in that the law school from which he

graduated had never become a member of the Association of

American Law Schools and was not provisionally approved by

the American Bar Association until 1987, some five years after

Petitioner's graduation. However, an exception to the above-

mentioned rules is provided by Section 22(c) of Article IV of

the Rules, which permits an applicant to submit an abstract of

10 years of practice in the District of Columbia or in a sister

state and

“If a thorough consideration of this abstract shows. . .

that his academic and legal scholarship conform to

approved standards and sum up to the equivalent of that

required of other candidates for admission, the Board may,

in its discretion, admit him to the examination.” (Appen-

dix A, p. 13)

Following Petitioner’s request for forms of application, he was

advised by the Florida Board of Bar Examiners that he did not

4

meet the requisite educational requirements and that it would

be necessary for Petitioner to qualify under Section 22(c) of

Article IV of the Rules in order to sit for the Florida Bar

Examination (Appendix B, p. 15). Further, such letter con-

tained detailed and explicit instructions on how to prepare an

abstract under Section 22(c) Appendix B, p. 15). Section

22(c) of the aforesaid Rules requires an abstract showing the

scope and character of the applicant’s previous experience and

practice at the bar, and requires samples of the applicant’s

work such as pleadings, briefs, legal memoranda, corporate

charter or other working papers which the applicant considers

illustrative of his expertise, academic and legal training. ( Ap-

pendix A, p. 13) The Petitioner filed a one-page memorandum,

to which was attached a six page civil complaint drawn by

Petitioner. (Appendix C, p. 19) The memorandum alleged that

Petitioner was unable to furnish any additional samples of his

work by reason of his not having actively practiced law subse-

quent to 1950. The Board, by a Notice of Board Action dated

February 15, 1973, notified the Petitioner that his application

for admission to the bar examination was denied, (Pet. Appen-

dix 7A). The Petitioner sought relief from the Supreme Court

of Florida. His petition to that court alleged (in paragraphs 3

and 7) that he was not seeking admission under Section 22(c)

of the Rules (Appendix D, p. 20) It is patently clear, however,

that Petitioner did not graduate from an accredited law school

so as to qualify to sit for the Florida Bar Examination unless

he could comply with the provisions of Section 22(c). It was,

therefore, unclear on what basis Petitioner sought relief in the

Supreme Court of Florida. His petition to that court was

denied without prejudice to the Petitioner to reapply to the

Board and furnish “reasonably accurate details of the extent of

his legal practice supported by appropriate documentation.”

(Pet. Appendix 1A-5A)

5

A petition to the Supreme Court of Florida for rehearing

was denied on May 7, 1973 (Pet. Appendix, 9A). Thereafter,

the Petitioner again made application to the Board of Bar

Examiners by filing a supplemental abstract on May 15, 1973.

The renewed application was denied by the Board on the

ground that he had still failed to provide sufficient information

to justify the Board in finding him qualified under the provi-

sions of Section 22(c), Article IV of the Rules of the Supreme

Court of Florida Relating to Admissions to the Bar. Petitioner

was so notified by Notice of Board Action dated May 31, 1973

(Pet. Appendix 10A)

The Petitioner did not seek review of the Board’s action of

May 31, 1973, and such action has not been reviewed by the

Supreme Court of Florida. Petitioner, therefore, has not

exhausted all remedies available to him below. Petitioner

herein now seeks certiorari directed to the Supreme Court of

Florida on the basis of that Court’s order entered on April 4,

1973 (Pet. Appendix 1A-5A) and the denial of the petition

for rehearing (Pet. Appendix 9A).

Petitioner stated in his petition to the Supreme Court of

Florida that he was not attempting to qualify under Section

22(c) of the Rules. (Appendix D, p. 20) However, his peti-

tion to this Court is almost solely based on an attack of the

constitutionality of Section 22(c) as he seeks to raise various

constitutional objections to such rule. It is difficult to deter-

mine on what grounds Petitioner bases his objections by reading

his brief. Apparently, Petitioner claims that such rule is in

derogation of the Fifth and Fourteenth Amendments to the

Constitution of the United States. Petitioner also asserts, under

the same constitutional provisions, that Rule 22(c) is vague

and therefore constitutionally defective and further that he was

6

unconstitutionally deprived of a hearing before his application

was denied. Petitioner also asserts that denial of admission to

the bar examination impairs the obligation of a contract,

although he never identifies the “contract” to which reference

is made.

REASONS FOR DENYING THE WRIT

1. A state can require high standards of qualification such

as . . . proficiency in its law before it admits an applicant to

the Bar so long as such standards or qualifications have a ratio-

nal connection with the applicant's fitness or capacity to practice

law. Schware v. Board of Bar Examiners, 355 U.S. 282, L.Ed.2d

796, 77 S.Ct. 752 (1957). The fact that an attorney |..s been

licensed in another state does not automatically entitle him to

practice in any state other than that in which he is licensed.

The requirement of training and graduation from an accredited

law school is, on its face, reasonable and rationally related to

the fitness to practice law. The State of Florida was not

required to permit an exception to this requirement, but has

done so, permitting the Board of Bar Examiners to consider an

abstract submitted by an applicant to establish, if possible, that

he possesses the equivalent of the requisite academic require-

ments. Such requirement is also reasonable and rationally

related to the determination of an applicant’s fitness to practice

law. Petitioner's abstract (Appendix C, p. 19) is simply inade-

quate to establish or allow the Board of Bar Examiners to

infer that Petitioner possesses the requisite expertise and aca-

demic and legal scholarship required by ‘the Supreme Court

of Florida.

2. Petitioner, under the facts of the instant case, is not

entitled to a hearing before being denied the right to sit for

7

the Florida Bar Examination. Admittedly, as in the cases cited

by Petitioner, where a person shows that he is in full compli-

ance with all the Court’s rules and is denied admission to

practice, he is entitled to a hearing and the opportunity to

rebut the basis for such denial. Both cases cited by Petitioner

turned on subjective opinions as to fitness of character. How-

ever, in the instant case, the Petitioner clearly shows by his

application that he is not within the class of those entitled to

be admitted to the Bar examination under the Rules of the

Supreme Court of Florida. See Brooks v. Laws, 208 Fed. 18

(Dist. of Col. 1953). Further, the Petitioner has not been

permanently denied the opportunity to practice law in Florida

or sit for the Bar examination. As the Supreme Court of Florida

noted in its opinion of April 4, 1973 (Pet. Appendix 1A-5A)

the Petitioner’s request for relief was denied without prejudice

to reapply at a later date when he can fully comply with the

Court's rules.

3. This Court has specifically recognized that a State is not

without power to charge non-residents a differential in licensing

matters where the increased fee would merely compensate the

State for any added burden the State may incur because the

applicant for the license is a non-resident. Toomer v. Witsell,

334 U.S. 385 at 398, 399 (1947). Also see American Commuters

Association v. Levitt, 279 F.Supp 40 at 48 (S.D. New York,

1967).

The application used by the Florida Board of Bar Examiners

contains three sections. Section “B” of such application is to be

completed only by those applicants who have been previously

admitted to practice law in any jurisdiction or court. (Appendix

E, p. 22) In addition to making its normal routine checks as

to character and fitness of an applicant, where the applicant has

been previously licensed, the Board of Bar Examiners must

make an extensive, and necessarily more expensive, review of

the expanded application by verifying and analyzing the infor-

mation contained in Section B of the application form. (Appen-

dix E, p. 22) Thezefore, to cover the expenses of such investi-

gation, practitioners from other states who apply to take the

Florida Bar examination are charged a higher application fee.

Such is nvt unequal treatment under the law since licensed

ers constitute a special class of applicants. Further,

the fee charges is not so onerous as to effectively prohibit out-

oi-state practitioners from applying for admission to practice

in Florida.

4. Petitioner's allegation that the U.S. Constitution is vio-

lated because a “state law enacted in 1955” is applied retro-

actively is totally without basis for a number of reasons. First,

Rule 22(c) is not a “state law,” but is a rule promulgated by

the Supreme Court of Florida in the exercise of its exclusive

to regulate the admission of persons to the practice

of law under Article V of the Constitution of the State of

Florida. Further, such rule is not applied “retroactively” so as

to disbar anyone who is previously admitted to practice. As

far back as 1845, Florida has made provision for those appli-

cants who were unable to meet all academic requirements of

the state, but who were licensed to practice in jurisdictions

other than Florida (Appendix F, p. 26) The applicant applied

for admission to the bar examination long subsequent to the

of this rule and should not be now heard to

complain simply because he cannot fall within any exceptions

to requisite academic requirements for admission to the bar

examination.

5. Rule 22(c) on its face is not vague and, therefore,

9

constitutionally void, but is alternatively quite detailed and

explicit in what is required to comply with the rule ( Appendix

A, p. 13) and as previously noted, the Petitioner received

detailed instructions on how to prepare an abstract (Appendix

B, p. 15) Nowhere in his petition is it alleged that the Peti-

Supreme Court of Florida which would require a further

exception to the academic standards established by that Court;

in fact, the Petitioner would have this Court by fiat impose a

rule on the Florida Board of Bar Examiners requiring them to

orally examine every licensed, out-of-state practitioner who

does not otherwise meet the requisite academic standards of

Rule 22(a) and 22(b) to determine if he is qualified to take

the bar examination. The Supreme Court of Florida has,

however, determined that the best means of determining

academic qualifications is to see written examples of one’s

work ‘over an extended period of time.

the opinion of the Board and of the Court, the academic equiv-

alency contemplated by the Rules.

CONCLUSION

Applicant was denied admission to the Florida Bar Examina-

tion because he failed to satisfy academic equivalency require-

10 -

ments. No question of due process is raised by such denial.

There are no substantial questions here which merit the Court’s

time and attention.

For the foregoing reasons, the petition for writ of certiorari

should be denied.

Respectfully submitted

C. Graham Carothers

Attorney for Respondent

P.O. Box 391

Tallahassee, Florida, 32302

ll

APPENDIX A

RULES OF THE

SUPREME COURT OF FLORIDA

Relating to Admission to the Bar

(In effect in 1972-73)

ARTICLE IV

EDUCATIONAL, CHARACTER AND

FITNESS REQUIREMENTS

Section 22

Every applicant is also required:

(a) To furnish the Board satisfactory evidence that the

within a period approved by the accrediting agency:

1. New England Association of Colleges and Secondary

Schools;

2. Middle States Association of Colleges and Secondary

Schools;

12.

8. North Central Association of Colleges and Secondary

Schools;

4. Southern Association of Colleges and Secondary Schools;

5. Northwest Association of Secondary and Higher Schools; ‘

6. Western College Association;

at a time when, or in the same calendar year in which such ,

school was so accredited.

This section shall be applicable only to those applying for

admission to the Bar who enrolled in any accredited law col-

lege subsequent to December 31, 1960. All other applicants

shall be governed by previous Section 22 (a) of Article IV of

the rules aforesaid. (At least two years’ in-residence college

work, or its equivalent. )

(b) To furnish the Board satisfactory evidence of gradua-

tion from a full-time accredited law school at a time when, or

in the same calendar year in which such school was so accred-

ited, and that such accredited law school has conferred upon

the applicant the degree of Bachelor of Laws or Doctor of Juris-

. The term, “accredited law school,” has reference to

any law school approved or provisionally approved by the

American Bar Association or which is a member of the Associa-

tion of American Law Schools. None of the following shall be

substituted for law school training;

1. Private study, correspondence school or law office training;

2. Age or experience;

13

3. Waived or lowered standards of legal training for particu-

lar persons or groups.

For the purpose of enforcement of this rule a degree in law

shall be deemed conferred and the applicant graduated when

the Dean of the Law School certifies to the Board that the ap-

plicant has completed the requirements for graduation and

that the degree will be conferred.

(c) Attorneys who were in good standing in the District of

Columbia and in the States of the United States of America

may, notwithstanding the provisions of Secions 22(a) and

22(b) hereof, be permitted to take the bar examination to be

admitted to the practice of law in Florida (1) upon furnishing

similar requirements as to fitness, except as required by Sections

22(a) and 22(b), as are required of other candidates to take

the examination; (2) upon producing such evidence as the

Board may require, that such applicant was in the practice of

law in the District of Columbia or in other States of the United

States of America, or in practice in federal courts in territories,

possessions or protectorates of the United States for at least

ten years, and that he was in good standing at the bar of the

District of Columbia, the territory, possession or protectorate,

or of the State from which he came; and ($3) updn furnishing

to the Board an abstract showing the scope and character of

the applicant’s previous experience and practice at the bar,

including samples of the quality of the applicant’s work, such

as pleadings, briefs, legal memoranda, corporate charters or

other working papers which the applicant considers illustrative

of his expertise, his academic and his legal training. Such ab-

stract should confine itself to the applicant's most recent ten

years of practice. If a thorough consideration of this abstract

shows that the applicant is a lawyer of high character and

14 .

ability, that his professional conduct has been above reproach,

and that his academic and legal scholarship conform to approved

standards and sum up to the equivalent of that required of

other candidates for admission to the examination, the Board

may, in its discretion, admit him to the examination. In evalu-

ating academic and legal scholarship the Board is clothed with

a broad discretion.

15

APPENDIX B

LETTER OF TRANSMITTAL AND INSTRUCTIONS

FOR PREPARING ABSTRACT OF PRACTICE

September 19, 1972

Mr. Julius P. Crowne

87-10 51 Avenue

Elmhurst, New York 11373

Dear Mr. Crowne:

Rules enclosed without charge.

Enclosed is Receipt No. 38836, in the amount of $5.00 as your

proof of having remitted the applicable fee(s) for the purchase

of:

x | One set of forms of application

for registration

for admission into the

* | Florida Bar Examination.

THE COST OF THE ABOVE ITEM MAY BE DEDUCTED

FROM THE APPROPRIATE FEE TO ACCOMPANY ANY

APPLICATION FOR REGISTRATION OR ADMISSION

INTO A FLORIDA BAR EXAMINATION WHICH YOU

MAY SUBSEQUENTLY FILE WITH THIS BOARD, PRO-

VIDED THAT THE ENCLOSED RECEIPT IS ATTACHED

16 -

TO SUCH APPLICATION. (Do not deduct the amount paid

for the purchase of former questions or documents. )

NOTICE: This receipt cannot be replaced, or the credit trans-

ferred to another person.

One set of questions from two previously-administered

Florida Bar Examinations.

Copy of document(s) previously filed. (The document

requested by you consists of pages. )

There is absolutely no residence requirement for admission

into the Florida Bar Examination.

Very truly yours,

James B. Tippin, Jr.

Executive Director

Please see page 2.

vm/am

Our records indicate that Brooklyn Law School was not provi-

sionally approved by the American Bar Association until

1937 and has never become a member of the Association of

American Law Schools. You state that you were graduated in

1982; therefore, your attention is invited to the following:

In that you do not meet the requirements of Article IV, Section

22(b), of the Rules, the only means whereby you may attempt

to qualify is under the provisions of Article IV, Section 22(c).

Applicants for the Spring (7/24, 25) 1973 Florida Bar Exam-

a ol

17

ination attempting to qualify under the provisions of Article

IV, Section 22(c), must file an abstract of their practice by

12/13/72.

Please note the following in drafting your abstract of practice:

1. By all means sacrifice brevity and modesty in favor of being

as thorough as it is humanly possible to be when drafting

your abstract of practice.

2. It is not required that you include in your abstract every

law suit which you have handled. However, you should

make certain to include a thoroughly representative number

of cases on which you have had the primary responsibility

covering a ten-year period of your practice. This should

include the style of the cause, the docket number if it were

litigated in the trial courts, or a citation showing the volume

in which the case was reported if concluded by an appeal.

The date on which the matter was handled should likewise

be shown, together with the nature of the action, whether

contract, tort, etc.

3. When referring to such actions as the organization of cor-

porations, state specifically that “On the following dates I

organized the following corporations,” etc., giving specific

information concerning each corporation organized, and

follow this same procedure when including such actions as

the organization of partnerships, drafting of wills, etc., by

stating, “On the following dates I organized the following

partnerships, this action including the following—”; “I

drafted the will of on these dates, such

actions having involved the following—”; and follow this

method of giving specific information concerning all your

actions during the period of time when you were engaged

in the practice of law that is being covered by the abstract.

18

4. Give some thought to preparing this document in a lawyer-

_ like fashion and file it with an original and four carbon

copies.

5. Include samples of the quality of your work, such as plead-

ings, briefs, legal memoranda, corporate charters or other

working papers which you consider illustrative of your

expertise, your academic and your legal training.

_ 6. Your abstract should confine itself to the most recent ten

years of your practice.

Please find enclosed two copies of an affidavit. Please execute

one copy and attach it to the original of your abstract of prac-

tice when filing that document with this office. You may retain

the second copy for your files.

The majority of applicants possess baccalaureate and law

degrees and automatically meet the technical qualifications for

admission into the examination. The only actions required by

the Board in these cases are the final determinations of char-

acter and fitness. However, it will be necessary for the Board

to determine your technical qualifications in advance, and for

this reason, it would be to your distinct advantage to file your

abstract at the earliest possible date.

Any questions which you may have are welcomed.

19

APPENDIX C

PETITIONER'S MEMORANDUM RELATING TO

ABSTRACT OF PRACTICE

RE: ABSTRACT OF PRACTICE

The attention of the Board is respectfully called to the fact :

(as disclosed in the application) that the applicant has not

been engaged in the practice of law since 1950, almost 23 yeaxs

ago and, starting with 1933 up to 1948 there was an interval

However, I have had the occasion to prosecute more recently

an action pro se. It involved personal injuries and property

damage to myself and wife because of negligence, was placed

on the calendar of the Supreme Court Queens County for trial

(State of New York) after a motion for a change of venue from

Bronx County. As the time for selection of the jury arrived a

conference between all sides was held in the chambers of the

justice of the Court and the matter was settled.

In this connection I am attaching to the papers a copy of my

marked pleading (complaint) on the assumption that the

answer, stipulations, motions for summary judgment and

venue change, bill of particulars, notices to admit and avail-

ability for medical examination, readiness statement and note

of issue are not also desired.

However, the nature of my practice when I was so engaged,

is succinctly set forth in answer to question 102(d) and sup-

plies the best picture thereof that can be furnished at the pres-

ent time.

JULIUS P. CROWNE

20

APPENDIX D

PETITION TO THE SUPREME COURT OF FLORIDA

SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF FLORIDA

In the Matter of the Application of

JULIUS P. CROWNE

- For Admission to the Spring, 1973

Bar Examination.

State of New York

County of Queens

The Amended Petition of JULIUS P. CROWNE respectfully

shows to this Honorable Court:

1. The First Paragraph of he [sic] original Petition should

read “Board of Bar Examiners” in place of “Board of Law

Examiners.”

2. The Third Paragraph thereof should be amplified to indi-

cate that the arbitrary action complained of also constituted a

deprivation of your Petitioner’s constitutional rights in that he

was denied the opportunity of a hearing to determine how

the Board arrived at its decision that he was not qualified to

take the Bar Examination; that it is evident that such action is

being attributed to the fact that your Petitioner has no evidence

to submit, after the more than (22) years since he ceased the

21

general practice of law, of having been an outstanding attorney

at that time; and that, having once been a practising [sic]

attorney, he is not to be granted the same privilege of going

through the burden of a Bar Examination which he is willing

to undergo as anyone else is permitted to do.

3. To the best of your Petitioner’s knowledge, investigation

of the Application is continuing subsequent to said denial with

a scrutiny as to character and fitness which your Petitioner is

confident can only support him at the very least equal to most

of the other candidates.

WHEREFORE, your Petitioner respectfully requests that the

relief sought herein be granted.

JULIUS P. CROWNE

Sworn to before me this

28 day of February, 1973 ~

APPENDIX E

SECTION B OF APPLICATION TO THE FLORIDA

BOARD OF BAR EXAMINERS

SECTION B

( This section must be completed by all applicants who have

been admitted to practice law in any jurisdiction or court.)

100. (a) Please name all jurisdictions and courts, State and

Federal, in which you have been admitted to prac-

tice law and give dates of admission.

Jurisdiction Court Date of Admission

I have enclosed (or requested and will forward

later) certificate(s) as to my current standing in

each of the above jurisdictions, both State and

Federal.

(b) Please state in which, if any, of the above jurisdic-

tions and courts you were required to appear before

any board committee or other examining authority

for examination or inquiry about any matter, other

eS See

tion with your application with your application for

admission to practice law, and the name and address

of any such authority.

(d) Have you been entitled to practice in each of the

and courts specified in your answer to

this question 100 continuously from the date you

first became so entitled until the date hereof?

been so entitled, the nature of tion, the

facts, and the name and address of the authority in

possession of the records thereof.

101. (a) Have you ever been disbarred?

Yes or No

(b) Have you ever been suspended from practice? ——

Yes or No

(c) Have you ever been reprimanded, censured or other-

wise disciplined? —___

Yes or No

sinieidiipntnesiniemeen ¢ | 3

24

(d) Have any charges or complaints, formal or informal,

ever been made or filed or proceedings instituted

against you?

Yes or No

(e) Have you ever appeared, formally or informally,

before a grievance or other similar committee of any

bar association or other law group?

Yes or No

If an affirmative answer is given to any of the foregoing

questions, please state the date, the nature of the charge, the

facts, disposition of the matter, and the name and address of

the authority in possession of the records thereof.

102. Please make a complete statement of your practice of the

law since first being admitted to practice in any jurisdic-

tion or court. Include temporary or part-time work. Please

state as to each employment or period of private practice:

(a) The periods during which you were employed as an

attorney, or engaged in private practice, with the

dates.

(b) The exact addresses of the offices, including room

numbers or places at which you were so employed

or engaged and the names and addresses of all em-

ployers, partners, associates, or persons sharing office

space, if any.

(c) The nature and extent of your duties or practice.

APPENDIX F

RULES GOVERNING FLORIDA BAR EXAMINATIONS

Rule 1 (e)

1945

(e)—RELATING TO THE ADMISSION OF FOREIGN

may require, that said applicant has been in the general

practice of law for at least ten years immediately preceding

the date of his application to take the examination, that he

is in good standing at the Bar of the State from which he comes,

and (3) the State Board of Law Examiners may require an

bas‘s for credit may take into consideration high school at-

tendance, college attendance, law school attendance, night

school attendance, study under a preceptor, study in a law