Hobbs said he underwent psychotherapy for five months with a doctor who diagnosed him with mild alcohol-use disorder and adjustment disorder with depression. He has since thrived in law school, where he had a 3.63 grade point average, according to his complaint. He says he maintains contact with his doctor, and is fit and able to pursue a law career, despite its reputation as a stressful profession prone to triggering mental illness.

"I had 10 years in the Army," said Hobbs, whose complaint states he won the Bronze Star, Army Commendation Medal and Army Achievement Medal, among others, while on military duty. "I performed well in the Army for 10 years, which is another high-stress environment."

Hobbs filed suit in federal court against the board, its executive director Michele Gavagni in her official capacity, and the Florida Supreme Court, which creates the rules governing bar admission. He asserted claims under Title II of the Americans with Disabilities Act and the Rehabilitation Act.

James J. Dean, the Tallahassee attorney from Messer Caparello representing the board and Gavagni, did not respond to requests for comment. But in court pleadings, the defendants moved to dismiss on several jurisdictional grounds. They argued lack of standing,ripeness and mootness, failure to state a claim for relief under the Americans with Disabilities Act, and immunity under the Eleventh Amendment of the U.S. Constitution.

"It is the applicant's responsibility to demonstrate that he satisfies the character and fitness requirements," Dean wrote in the motion to dismiss. "The Bar Admission Rules set forth, with specificity, the 'essential eligibility requirements' that must be satisfied."

As for questions No. 25 and 26, which ask about mental illness, the board said the high court "regularly admits applicants with a history of both mental disorders and treatment by mental health professionals, and encourages applicants to seek mental health treatment whennecessary." It said it required additional screening because "it is dangerous to rely on the patient for an objective assessment of the appropriateness of their substance use."

U.S. District Judge Robert L. Hinkle in Tallahassee dismissed the claims against the Florida Supreme Court for lack of standing, but denied the motion to throw out the suit against the board and its executive director — leaving the remaining parties to prove their case.

"The board may believe that a patient's own treating professional may be unduly supportive of the patient, or even that a Veterans Administration professional may be unduly supportive of a veteran," Hinkle wrote. "But one might also believe that a professional who routinely accepts referrals from the board may be overly demanding of an applicant with a disability. One cannot know, based on the allegations of this complaint, whether the board violated the ADA. The complaint plausibly alleges that the scope of the evaluation the board demanded was not reasonably related to Mr. Hobbs's fitness to practice law."