Application, University of Jacksonville
Application, University of Jacksonville
Opinion of the Court
The University of Jacksonville filed its petition *Page 880 in this Court praying for an order approving its course of study in law. A rule nisi was issued directed to the State Board of Law Examiners and the State Bar Association commanding them to show cause why the petition should not be granted.
The State Board of Law Examiners and the State Bar Association appeared, moved to quash the rule nisi and on the issue thus made, the cause was heard March 26, 1937, in connection with the petition of the State Bar Association and others to approve and adopt rules proposed by them for the regulation of the bar.
The petitioner apparently relied on Section 4181, Compiled General Laws of 1927 for the relief sought. The petition must be and is hereby denied because, (1) this Court is not authorized to approve the course of study of any law school and, (2) while we are authorized under Section 4180, Compiled General Laws of 1927, to prescribe courses of study to be pursued by applicants for admission to the bar the course so prescribed is the identical one that law schools are required by Section 4181, Compiled General Laws, to maintain. Such a course has been prescribed as the law directs and is available to petitioner on requisition to the Clerk of this Court.
If petitioner desires to secure for its graduates like privileges as are granted to graduates of law schools under Section 4181, supra, it is necessary that it make showing to the State Board of Law Examiners that it has maintained the course of study prescribed by this Court, that it offers library facilities to its students equivalent to those offered by law schools complying with Section 4181, supra, that it has a faculty of equivalent qualification to the faculty of said law schools and that its equipment and facilities for preparation for the bar are in other respects equal to that offered by "A" grade law schools in this country. *Page 881
For a full discussion of our views on this and cognate questions see Ex parte Florida State Bar Association, et al., opinion filed this date.
It is so ordered.
ELLIS, C.J., and WHITFIELD and BROWN, J.J., concur.
CHAPMAN, J., disqualified.
RULE 25. Rehearings must be applied for by petition in writing within fifteen days after the filing of the judgment, decree or order of the court, unless further time is allowed by the court. The petition shall not assume any new ground or position not taken in the original argument or briefs upon which the cause was submitted, and must set forth concisely the omissions, causes or grounds on which it is based, and must point out specifically in what respect the original opinion and decision is deemed by the petitioner to be erroneous in some material matter of law or fact, setting forth concisely the reasons why the matters specified are supposed to be erroneous.
A copy of the petition shall be served upon the opposite party or counsel at or before the time of its submission to the Court. It shall not be considered a part of the record in the cause unless so ordered or rehearing granted. No argument shall be allowed on the petition. When a petition for rehearing is denied, the Clerk shall forthwith issue *Page 882 and transmit the mandate to the court below. The petitioner shall not be entitled to file any additional petition.
It is further ordered that the above amended Rule shall become effective on and after March 15th, A.D. 1939.
Adopted and promulgated this 8th day of February, A.D. 1939.
All applications for writs of mandamus, certiorari, prohibition, quo warranto, habeas corpus, and other writs necessary to the complete exercise of the jurisdiction of this Court as authorized by Section 5, Article V, of the Constitution shall be made as herein provided and may be heard any Tuesday at 9:30 A.M. provided five days notice of such application shall have been given to the adverse party or his counsel and proof thereof filed with the Clerk of this Court. Applications raising questions of fact which will require the taking of testimony to determine will not be entertained. If presented in person, no further oral argument on them will be permitted. Copy of every brief required under this rule shall be furnished the adverse party.
Original petitions in mandamus will not be entertained by this Court unless a State officer, State board, State functionary, or some other agency authorized to represent the public generally, is named as Respondent. It shall be the duty of Relator to furnish the Respondent named a copy of the petition at the time he is served with notice of application for the alternative writ and failure to do so shall be cause to dismiss the petition.
Rules 34, 35, 36, and 37 governing certiorari are hereby repealed. This rule shall become effective February 15, 1939.
*Page 886Approved January 17, 1939.
Reference
- Full Case Name
- In the Supreme Court of Florida, June Term, A.D. 1938. Division A. in Re: Application of the University of Jacksonville, a Corporation, Not for Profit, for an Order Approving Its Course of Study of Law.
- Status
- Published