Years ago I learned that in Wisconsin an attorney doesn’t have to pass a bar exam to practice if they graduated with a JD from an accredited Wisconsin school.
So what I’m wondering is if you pass the bar without a degree are there states that allow that?
There are 4 states that allow you to take the bar exam if you have apprenticed with a lawyer or judge. If you pass, you’re a lawyer without a law degree. California, Virginia, Washington, and Vermont.
ETA: Incidentally, ordinarily my state does not grant “diploma privilege,” but due to logistical issues with social distancing for the bar exam this year, the Supreme Court has granted a one-time diploma privilege due to Covid-19.
You’re describing two diametrically opposed scenarios in your question. A JD is an academic degree; the bar admission is not, it is a professional licence for which you need to sit the bar exam, and the bar exam is not an academic examination but a professional one.
To my knowledge, there are no jurisdictions in the United States that allow the practice of law without having passed the bar exam. There are, however, some states that will let you sit the bar exam after what is called “reading law”, i.e., being an apprentice under a practicing lawyer, without getting a JD. This is rare nowadays but had some historical importance (it is how Abraham Lincioln got into law, for instance). the vast majority of lawyers - also in those states that allow reading law - follow, of course, the standard route, which is getting a JD (an academic degree) and then using that JD as an admission requirement to sit the bar exam.
Also, if memory serves, in New York, you can take the bar exam with some combination of law school and apprenticeship (without obtaining a degree) – I think it’s a minimum of one year of school and a total “learning” process of four years (so you can do one and three or two and two).
What the OP is describing is the so-called “diploma privilege” which, in fact, allows you to be admitted to the bar without taking the bar exam if you graduate from an in-state law school. The Wikipedia page tells me that it used to be common, but I’ve always associated it as a uniquely Wisconsin thing (which still does it). As eschrodinger noted, it’s been temporarily proposed (and adopted) in a number of states as an emergency response to the COVID issue.
Relatedly, it’s also fairly common to be admitted to the bar in a state after having taken (and passed) the bar exam in a different state.
Kim Kardashian says, “Yes you can!”, (and she’s married to Kanye and friends with the prez, so she’d know!)
What the OP is describing is the so-called “diploma privilege” which, in fact, allows you to be admitted to the bar without taking the bar exam if you graduate from an in-state law school. The Wikipedia page tells me that it used to be common, but I’ve always associated it as a uniquely Wisconsin thing (which still does it).
Ah, OK. That is new to me, so I stand corrected on that point. Still, I think the OP is conflating two diametrically opposed scenarios here:
An interesting question would be whether you can combine both scenarios - practice law without having either a JD or passed the bar exam. I highly doubt this is possible anywhere.
Maybe I should have been clearer. I live in Wisconsin so I understand the in-state rule about the bar. My main question was whether you can practice law, in any state, without a JD so long as you pass that state’s bar exam. They’re 2 separate issues and my intent was to focus on the latter.
Thanks for all the info so far gang.
On a side note I wonder the same about medicine. Though I suspect that is far more restrictive
Wait, can’t a person defend himself in court? I know it’s a nitpick but that sounds like anyone can technically practice. Though of course he wouldn’t be offering a service really so I get that aspect.
Not really responsive to the OP’s questions, but in MANY “legal” proceedings, one can choose to be represented by a non-attorney. One example is Social Security disability proceedings/hearings.
I understood that you were familiar with the diploma privilege, and you were asking about, essentially, the flip side of that.
I’ll point out as well that, while diploma privilege means you don’t have to pass the bar exam, you do (I think in every state) have to be a member of the state bar to practice. That’s the “privilege” – you get to be a member without taking the test.
Also, it’s true that nonlawyer individuals can represent themselves, but they cannot generally represent anyone else, and only members of the bar may call themselves lawyer, attorney, etc. The same is true of other professions – you can’t call yourself an architect, engineer, or accountant either, unless properly licensed.
Here in NC for a long time anyone could be a judge, no law degree was required. That changed in the 80s. All judges are elected right up to the supreme court level. By coincidence the NC bar exam is next week here.
Also architects here can work as an apprentice instead of getting a degree but they still must pass the architect exam to be certified.
My main question was whether you can practice law, in any state, without a JD so long as you pass that state’s bar exam. They’re 2 separate issues and my intent was to focus on the latter.
That is the “reading law” scenario which Wikipedia describes here.
Wait, can’t a person defend himself in court? I know it’s a nitpick but that sounds like anyone can technically practice. Though of course he wouldn’t be offering a service really so I get that aspect.
Sure, people can defend themselves in court, but that is not what is meant by “practicing law”. That term means giving leagl advice to others.
By the way, the concept of “practicing law” is not limited to litigation. If you provide contract drafting and review services for someone else in a setting where no court is involved, that can also be practicing the law. Obviously there is an area where people who are not lawyers themselves but have expertise in the areas can help out friends and family reviewing a letter. But as soon as you’re getting paid for it, you’re entering territory where - depending on how restrictive the jurisdiction in question is - you can be considered as practicing the law, which you need a bar admission for.
You can represent yourself in a legal proceeding (as the saying goes “a person wh9o represents himself has a fool for a lawyer and a fool for a client”). AFAIK - You cannot sit in, even unpaid, to help represent someone else in a formal legal proceeding. Unless it’s you on trial or suing or whatever, you have no more rights in the courtroom than any other spectator without that accreditation.
Funny, new Perry Mason TV series prequel has him as an investigator attached to a lawyer. And then in the most recent episode he becomes a lawyer due to this “apprenticeship.” (California) Thought it was some Hollywood weirdness and then I saw this thread.
That accidentally confuses two things: rights in the courtroom, and “sit in … to help … someone else”
Lawyers do have paid staff, and they do sit in to help represent someone else. Before the courts were closed for COVID, my niece, the law student, was being paid to sit in court and help represent someone.
Varies from state to state, but is a lot tougher now than it used to be.
Generally, you have to have either an accredited college degree, or something even better. For foreign graduates, certification is now mostly from the Educational Commission for Foreign-Trained Medical Graduates. Once you’ve got that, you can do the exams and a couple of years of internship. The “something even better” is something like board certification. It doesn’t make it any easier, it just means you don’t have to pull out your college certification again.
It’s a lot less formal if you want to practice in a 3rd-World country. Last I looked, if you want to prescribe morphine in PNG, it just takes a couple of months while they check if you really are qualified. And it only takes that long because they have better things to do with their time.
But - can they sit there and do that without an accredited lawyer to be the official mouthpiece? Can they even address the court? “I have an urgent bail hearing. My articling student Karen will deal with this case. See you at the first tee at 3PM sharp, Judge,”
What if I’m facing a charge. I want someone to speak for me on the record, examine witnesses, perform cross-examination, etc. They aren’t accredited, I can’t afford council and I refuse a PD because I don’t believe they’re competent to fight the state’s resources?
And there’s no chance of being ruled mentally ill or whatever. I’ve heard of many cases (relatively) of so-called jail house lawyers who do nothing with their time but studying law. I assume in instances because they literally have nothing else to do all day.
So I’m up on murder or robbery or something and want to defend myself. Frank is serving 8 life sentences for writing checks with a cute kitten motif to UNICEF and they all bounced.
He decided to spend 20 years doing nothing with his free time reading case law and other related things. This guy doesn’t need a clerk or paralegal to know the machinations.
Would I really need to skip him and rely on a PD? From what I’ve read Frank wouldn’t be able to help the PD. And if he could in this hypothetical, wouldn’t that be legal assistance?
I know this is off the original rail of my possible train- wreck OP. Haven’t had my ADD med in a couple years. Sorry
In Commonwealth countries, leave can be given for a ‘McKenzie Friend’ to sit at the bar table of a litigant and provide assistance. They generally can’t address the court though. The original McKenzie Friend was actually an Australian barrister who is now a silk here in Queensland. He didn’t have the right to practise in the UK, and the court refused him leave to provide assistance.