argued that the classes violate their First
Amendment rights and are not germane to the practice of law. Oakland sole practitioner
Mark Greenberg originally filed suit in 1991. He argued in his petition that the MCLE
courses in question “are not germane to the practice of law in the proper sense of
the term ‘germane,’” and “even if the topics are germane, compulsory
attendance in a class is an unnecessarily intrusive method of advancing these goals.”
Bar attorneys responded that two hours of instruction over a
three-year period “is not a substantial enough intrusion to warrant constitutional
scrutiny.”
In the second case, Los Angeles attorney Joseph R. Giannini sought to
overturn a federal appeals court’s rejection of a lawsuit by 10 California attorneys
who argued that their constitutional and statutory rights are violated by local
reciprocity rules in the majority of U.S. district courts that condition admission to
their bars on membership in the bar of the state in which the courts are located.
All four California district courts have adopted rules that restrict
general bar admission to attorneys from California and also restrict pro hac vice
admission.
The issue of reciprocity in bar admissions has been a hot topic in
several states, including California, which is now studying the question of whether
out-of-state lawyers should be allowed to practice here without taking the bar
examination. |
