In an era when top in-house attorneys have spoken out on issues from net neutrality to immigration, an Atlanta legal boss used her personal experience to advocate for attorneys who are military spouses.

Sloane Perras, senior vice president and chief administrative and legal officer at fast food restaurant chain The Krystal Co., signed onto an amicus brief urging the Georgia Supreme Court to overturn the state Board of Bar Examiners' denial of a military spouse's request to practice law without having to pass the Georgia bar exam.

And last week, the state high court did just that, ruling that the state bar erred when it denied, without giving a reason, a woman's waiver request based on her status as the spouse of an active member of the military who had been transferred to Georgia. More than 30 states have military spouse licensing accommodations for lawyers, and more than a dozen more are working on such efforts, according to the Military Spouse JD Network.

Like the woman in that case, Harriet O'Neal, Perras knows a thing or two about the hardships of being a military spouse while also seeking a legal career. While married to an active duty Air Force pilot, she worked a total of eight jobs between 2003 and 2009, according to the amicus brief, and passed five U.S. bar examinations all within three years of graduating law school due to military relocations.

Such relocations, Perras said, are more than a mere inconvenience.

“The reality of a bar exam only being offered twice a year, and you may be moving at a moment's notice, prevents effective job searching for a traditional position,” she said in an email. “As a result, you can become pigeon-holed as 'that contract lawyer' instead of the person you really are.”

The availability of a waiver like the one at issue in the Georgia Supreme Court case, however, allows military spouse lawyers to move “to the next meaningful step in [their] career more expeditiously, a critical element in avoiding the dreaded 'resume break' between jobs that can be a negative screening tool for prospective employers overwhelmed by submissions,” she added.

Perras said she became involved in the amicus effort at the request of Linda Klein, a partner at Baker, Donelson, Bearman, Caldwell & Berkowitz and immediate past-president of the American Bar Association. In that role, Klein created a program to provide veterans access to legal assistance, an experience that informed her of issues unique to military families.

Besides Klein and Perras, two other amici—former U.S. Navy officer and longtime securities litigator Oscar Persons and Baker Donelson partner and former general counsel at the U.S. Department of Homeland Security Joe Whitley—signed onto the brief to advocate for the constitutional mandate and necessity of a strong national defense and military.

Unlike other GCs and CLOs whose public advocacy has been directly related to their employers' business interests, Perras' involvement sprang from her personal experience. Nonetheless, she said that she received “100 percent” support from Krystal and its CEO, who encouraged Perras to participate in the effort.

“Like many franchisors, Krystal actively seeks military veterans as employees and franchisees to grow with us and start their own businesses, post military career,” she said.

In the O'Neal case, the justices remanded the matter to the bar. As of last week, it was reviewing the opinion, after which the board would decide how to proceed, the director said at the time.