Featured Chrome Extensions:

Casey IRACs are produced by an AI that analyzes the opinion’s content to construct its analysis. While we strive for accuracy, the output may not be flawless. For a complete and precise understanding, please refer to the linked opinions above.

Keywords

attorneyappealfamily lawdue process
appealwillfamily lawdue process

Related Cases

Mickens v. Taylor, 535 U.S. 162, 122 S.Ct. 1237, 152 L.Ed.2d 291, 70 USLW 4205, 70 USLW 4216, 02 Cal. Daily Op. Serv. 2737, 2002 Daily Journal D.A.R. 3311, 15 Fla. L. Weekly Fed. S 161
View Case »
Haines v. Liggett Group Inc., 975 F.2d 81, 61 USLW 2148, 36 Fed. R. Evid. Serv. 782
View Case »
Greenwald v. Eisinger, Brown, Lewis & Frankel, P.A., 118 So.3d 867, 38 Fla. L. Weekly D1514
View Case »
F.D.I.C. v. Ogden Corp., 202 F.3d 454, 46 Fed.R.Serv.3d 772
View Case »
Kimmelman v. Morrison, 477 U.S. 365, 106 S.Ct. 2574, 91 L.Ed.2d 305, 54 USLW 4789
View Case »
Justia Law Link
LexisNexis Link
Westlaw Link
CourtListener Link
Oyez Link

The Florida Bar re Ines, 718 So.2d 779, 23 Fla. L. Weekly S478

Facts

Victor D. Ines, an attorney, attempted the marital and family law certification examination in 1995 and 1996 but did not achieve a passing score. After his second failure, he petitioned for a grade review, claiming he did not receive appropriate credit for several essay answers. The grade review panel increased his scores on some essays, but it was not enough to pass. Ines appealed this decision through various committees, ultimately leading to an appeal to the Supreme Court of Florida.

Ines took and completed the 1995 administration of the marital and family law certification examination, but he failed to achieve a passing score. He took and completed the 1996 administration of the examination and again failed to achieve a passing score.

Issue

Did the Board of Legal Specialization and Education's (BLSE) certification process violate due process and was it arbitrary and capricious?

In his appeal before this Court, Ines argues that the entire marital and family law certification examination process is arbitrary, capricious, and violative of due process.

Rule

The court upheld the BLSE's holistic grading method and the equal weighting of the essay portion of the exam with other parts, as well as the policy prohibiting reapplication for two years after two consecutive failures.

We reject his challenges to the holistic grading method and the grade review process based on our recent decision in Florida Bar re Williams, No. 92,038 (Fla. Sept.17, 1998), in which we uphold the holistic grading method and the grade review process.

Analysis

The court found that Ines failed to demonstrate that the equal weighting of the essay portion with the multiple choice and short answer portions of the exam constituted an abuse of discretion. The court also agreed with the BLSE's reasoning that the two-year prohibition on reapplying after two consecutive failures was reasonable, as it allowed for further study and skill enhancement.

We similarly find that Ines has failed to show any error in the assignment of equal weight to the essay portion and the multiple choice and short answer portion of the marital and family law certification examination.

Conclusion

The Supreme Court affirmed the decision of the Board of Governors, concluding that the certification process was not arbitrary or capricious and did not violate due process.

Accordingly, we affirm the decision of the Board of Governors.

Who won?

The Board of Governors of The Florida Bar prevailed because the court found their certification process to be reasonable and not in violation of due process.

The BLSE points out that the policy is based on two concerns: (1) that two consecutive failures indicate a need for further experience, study, and skill enhancement; and (2) that an applicant allowed to take the examination immediately after two consecutive failures would have an unfair advantage over other applicants.

You must be