
    Petition of Philip Stephen BENNETT for the issuance of a certificate to practice law in the State of Florida and for admission to The Florida Bar.
    No. 33185.
    Supreme Court of Florida.
    Oct. 28, 1964.
    
      Philip Stephen Bennett, in pro. per., and Robert A. Chastain, Tallahassee, for petitioner.
    August C. Paoli, Hollywood, and A. Dallas Albritton, Jr., Tampa, for The Florida Board of Bar Examiners, respondent.
   PER CURIAM.

Upon further consideration of the application of Philip Stephen Bennett for admission to The Florida Bar pursuant to the provisions of Chapter 26655 § 3, Laws of Florida, Acts of 1951, and the report of the Florida Board of Bar Examiners filed upon the order of this Court June 10, 1964, 165 So.2d 169, we find the petitioner technically qualified and morally fit.

Therefore, it is ordered that upon his taking, subscribing and filing the oath prescribed by Section 23, of Article V, of the Rules of the Supreme Court of Florida Relating to Admission to the Bar, 31 F.S.A., Philip Stephen Bennett shall be admitted as-a member of The Florida Bar and the-Clerk shall engross his name upon the roll of members thereof.

DREW, C. J., and THOMAS, ROBERTS, CALDWELL and ERVIN, JJ.r concur.

THORNAL, J., dissents with opinion.

O’CONNELL, J., dissents and concurs' with THORNAL, J.

THORNAL, Justice

(dissenting).

Mr. Bennett wants to be admitted to the practice of law under the so-called “diploma privilege”. He claims that he was “enrolled” in a Florida Law College prior to’ July 25, 1951 when the “diploma privilege” was abolished. Chapter 26655, Section 3, Laws of Florida, 1951. It is clear that he intended to enter law school in the fall of 1951. However, it is equally clear to me that he was not “enrolled” prior to the critical date. I sympathize with the applicant. However, over ten years have elapsed since he graduated from law school. He has actually taken the Bar Examination twice. Both times he failed. So far as I know, Mr. Bennett is a fine man. I simply feel that he should be required to pass the Bar Examination before being admitted to practice law. The Board of Bar Examiners has so ruled. I would approve that decision. The majority holds to the contrary.

I therefore dissent.

O’CONNELL, J., concurs.  