S.C. giving 1st bar exam since test ruled flawed
Law Firm News
Warren Westbrook "Brook" Wills was in Paris on an international law internship in October when he saw the disappointing news on the S.C. Judicial Department's Web site.
He hadn't passed the July bar exam, which meant he couldn't practice law in South Carolina.
But a week later, he learned the Supreme Court had announced that 20 others, including Wills, had passed after the court threw out one essay section.
"So now I've gone from the depths of despair to the height of joy in a week," recalled Wills, 39, now a lawyer in Atlanta.
As a new group of law students sits for the bar exam today, two of the 20 people whose grades were changed talked publicly for the first time to The State newspaper about the exam and how the court handled the matter.
The group includes eight Charleston School of Law graduates and two USC School of Law graduates.
Another group of law school graduates is scheduled to take the seven-section bar exam over three days starting today. As of Friday, 245 people had signed up to take the test, said Dan Shearouse, clerk of the Supreme Court.
More than 380 people who passed the July exam were sworn in to the S.C. Bar in November.
They included the daughters of Rep. Jim Harrison, R-Richland, chairman of the House Judiciary Committee; and longtime Circuit Judge Paul Burch of Pageland. Catherine Harrison and Kendall Burch were among the 20 who passed the July test after the Supreme Court's intervention.
Jim Harrison and Paul Burch earlier told The State they had contacted court officials after learning their daughters had failed the exam. Harrison, an attorney, stressed that he was inquiring about the unusually high number of examinees who had flunked the wills, trusts and estates essay section.
Chief Justice Jean Toal -- and the Supreme Court in prepared statements on their Web site -- have said justices didn't know the identities of the 20 before they threw out the wills, trusts and estates section on Nov. 2.
"I don't think what those fathers of those two girls did was wrong," one of the 20 said. "There have been other dads in the past who have done this."
Still, he didn't believe that Harrison's and Burch's contact with court officials -- which might have violated court rules -- influenced the high court's decision, noting, "I have faith that the system wasn't going to lay down for these two dads."
Related listings
-
DC Young Lawyers in for Bar Exam Sticker Shock
Law Firm News 03/05/2008An attempt to save young lawyers from higher bar exam fees has failed in the Maryland Senate, meaning prospective attorneys could pay hundreds more to pass the bar. A bill headed for approval in the Senate would increase bar exam fees from $150 up to...
-
2008 Arizona Bar Exam Deadlines and Fees
Law Firm News 02/29/2008February 2008 No applications accepted prior $125 application and $235 examination to August 15, 2007 September 1, 2007  ...
-
February 2008 CA Bar Exam Deadlines
Law Firm News 02/28/2008FEBRUARY 2008 CALIFORNIA BAR EXAMINATION INFORMATION DATE, TIME, LOCATIONS, FEES AND IMPORTANT DEADLINES DATE: Tuesday, Wednesday and Thursday, February 26, 27 and 28, 2008 TIME: Morning and Afternoon on Tuesday, Wednesday, and Thursday. Important Da...
Forte Law Group is a trusted resource to protect your child’s needs.
Based on the culmination of ongoing state, municipal and board of education budget cuts, coupled with school districts having to do more with less resources, the current climate within schools often dictates that you may require a special education attorney to achieve the best results when advocating for your child’s right to a free appropriate public education. Coupled with increasing class sizes, your child may slip through the cracks within the school system itself and not be receiving an appropriate education with measurable goals and objectives.
A Connecticut Special Education Attorney Knows the Law
Often is the situation that there already exists a high level of frustration and contention between the family and school when special education and related services are not being appropriately delivered. Many times, the relationship between family and school results in an adversarial environment that is not conducive towards a team approach for the benefit of your child’s needs.