Debate Reignited Over Reciprocity Admission Rules
This column explores the interrelationship between law technology and ethics. Nowhere is this intersection more timely, controversial and thought-provoking than in the issue of and the rules that govern admission to the bar.
January 05, 2015 at 01:44 PM
8 minute read
This column explores the interrelationship between law technology and ethics. Nowhere is this intersection more timely, controversial and thought-provoking than in the issue of and the rules that govern admission to the bar. Students graduating from law school generally are limited by the calendar to taking two bar examinations after graduation. In this region, law school graduates typically take the Pennsylvania and New Jersey exams. Further north, they take the New Jersey and New York exams. This pattern repeats itself throughout the country.
The problem, however, is that by arbitrarily limiting applicants to two states' examinations at one sitting, the bar admission authorities are in effect using the calendar to restrict the number of people who apply for admission to the bar and, consequently, become licensed as attorneys in any given state. This is in addition to the fact that certain states where individuals may want to retire at some point have lower passage rates, which most people believe are designed in part to discourage applicants.
This problem was highlighted by the recent decision of U.S. District Judge Gerald McHugh of the Eastern District of Pennsylvania in National Association for the Advancement of Multijurisdictional Practice v. Castille, 2014 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 171341 (E.D. Pa. Dec. 11, 2014). McHugh ruled that Pennsylvania Bar Admission Rule 204 is constitutional. Rule 204 allows lawyers licensed in other states to be admitted to the bar in Pennsylvania without taking the bar exam, provided that they are licensed in a state with reciprocity with Pennsylvania and the lawyer meets certain other admission requirements. In other words, if a lawyer has passed the bar exam in a state with reciprocity with Pennsylvania, she may be admitted by motion. She may not be admitted by motion, however, if she took the bar exam in a state without reciprocity or if she took the bar exam in a state without reciprocity and then waived into a state with reciprocity—because she had not taken the bar exam in any state with reciprocity with Pennsylvania.
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
NOT FOR REPRINT
© 2024 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.
You Might Like
View AllTrending Stories
Who Got The Work
Michael G. Bongiorno, Andrew Scott Dulberg and Elizabeth E. Driscoll from Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale and Dorr have stepped in to represent Symbotic Inc., an A.I.-enabled technology platform that focuses on increasing supply chain efficiency, and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The case, filed Oct. 2 in Massachusetts District Court by the Brown Law Firm on behalf of Stephen Austen, accuses certain officers and directors of misleading investors in regard to Symbotic's potential for margin growth by failing to disclose that the company was not equipped to timely deploy its systems or manage expenses through project delays. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Nathaniel M. Gorton, is 1:24-cv-12522, Austen v. Cohen et al.
Who Got The Work
Edmund Polubinski and Marie Killmond of Davis Polk & Wardwell have entered appearances for data platform software development company MongoDB and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The action, filed Oct. 7 in New York Southern District Court by the Brown Law Firm, accuses the company's directors and/or officers of falsely expressing confidence in the company’s restructuring of its sales incentive plan and downplaying the severity of decreases in its upfront commitments. The case is 1:24-cv-07594, Roy v. Ittycheria et al.
Who Got The Work
Amy O. Bruchs and Kurt F. Ellison of Michael Best & Friedrich have entered appearances for Epic Systems Corp. in a pending employment discrimination lawsuit. The suit was filed Sept. 7 in Wisconsin Western District Court by Levine Eisberner LLC and Siri & Glimstad on behalf of a project manager who claims that he was wrongfully terminated after applying for a religious exemption to the defendant's COVID-19 vaccine mandate. The case, assigned to U.S. Magistrate Judge Anita Marie Boor, is 3:24-cv-00630, Secker, Nathan v. Epic Systems Corporation.
Who Got The Work
David X. Sullivan, Thomas J. Finn and Gregory A. Hall from McCarter & English have entered appearances for Sunrun Installation Services in a pending civil rights lawsuit. The complaint was filed Sept. 4 in Connecticut District Court by attorney Robert M. Berke on behalf of former employee George Edward Steins, who was arrested and charged with employing an unregistered home improvement salesperson. The complaint alleges that had Sunrun informed the Connecticut Department of Consumer Protection that the plaintiff's employment had ended in 2017 and that he no longer held Sunrun's home improvement contractor license, he would not have been hit with charges, which were dismissed in May 2024. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Jeffrey A. Meyer, is 3:24-cv-01423, Steins v. Sunrun, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Greenberg Traurig shareholder Joshua L. Raskin has entered an appearance for boohoo.com UK Ltd. in a pending patent infringement lawsuit. The suit, filed Sept. 3 in Texas Eastern District Court by Rozier Hardt McDonough on behalf of Alto Dynamics, asserts five patents related to an online shopping platform. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Rodney Gilstrap, is 2:24-cv-00719, Alto Dynamics, LLC v. boohoo.com UK Limited.
Featured Firms
Law Offices of Gary Martin Hays & Associates, P.C.
(470) 294-1674
Law Offices of Mark E. Salomone
(857) 444-6468
Smith & Hassler
(713) 739-1250