Florida Bar v. Strickland

468 So. 2d 983, 10 Fla. L. Weekly 261, 1985 Fla. LEXIS 3318
CourtSupreme Court of Florida
DecidedMay 2, 1985
DocketNo. 64329
StatusPublished
Cited by4 cases

This text of 468 So. 2d 983 (Florida Bar v. Strickland) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Supreme Court of Florida primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Florida Bar v. Strickland, 468 So. 2d 983, 10 Fla. L. Weekly 261, 1985 Fla. LEXIS 3318 (Fla. 1985).

Opinion

ADKINS, Justice.

On the complaint of The Florida Bar and the report of the referee, we have before us an unauthorized practice of law proceeding. We approve the joint stipulation of the parties and the order approving the stipulation entered by the Honorable Frederick N. Barad, circuit court judge, as referee.

Although respondent did not admit the allegations in the petition against unauthorized practice of law, he did agree to entry of an order and permanent injunction against his engaging in or conducting any activities which would be deemed the unauthorized practice of law. The following activities constitute the unauthorized practice of law and may not be carried out or conducted in Florida by respondent, who is permanently restrained and enjoined from conducting any activities which constitute the unauthorized practice of law including, without limitations, the following:

(a) Counselling persons as to their rights under Florida law regarding domestic or marital relations;
(b) Assisting in preparation of any legal documents relating to domestic or marital relations; and,
(c) Appearing in Florida courts on behalf of a party in a case relating to domestic or marital relations.

In the event respondent engages in any of said conduct enjoined herein and has not been duly licensed to practice law in Florida, he will be found in indirect contempt of the Supreme Court of Florida for the unauthorized practice of law in this state.

Judgment for costs in the amount of $88.15 is hereby entered against respondent, for which sum let execution issue.

It is so ordered.

BOYD, C.J., and OVERTON, ALDERMAN, MCDONALD, EHRLICH and SHAW, JJ., concur.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Related

The Florida Bar Re: Advisory Opinion - Shore v. Wall
265 So. 3d 447 (Supreme Court of Florida, 2018)
Florida Bar re Advisory Opinion Hrs Nonlawyer Counselor
518 So. 2d 1270 (Supreme Court of Florida, 1988)
The Florida Bar v. Dobbs
508 So. 2d 326 (Supreme Court of Florida, 1987)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
468 So. 2d 983, 10 Fla. L. Weekly 261, 1985 Fla. LEXIS 3318, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/florida-bar-v-strickland-fla-1985.