Appert, Application of
| Decision Date | 06 February 1984 |
| Docket Number | No. 84-OB-0222,84-OB-0222 |
| Citation | 444 So.2d 1208 |
| Parties | In re Application of Bruno Justin APPERT, David William Bernberg, Tien-Chin Chang, K. Jayaraman, and Musa Rahman. |
| Court | Louisiana Supreme Court |
In Re: Bruno Justin Appert, David William Bernberg, Tien-Chin Chang, K. Jayaraman and Musa Rahman, applying for Permission to take the Louisiana Bar Examination.
Application to take bar examination granted. On the showing made it appears that applicants are foreign nationals lawfully within the United States. The Bar Committee is directed to consider such persons as resident aliens. See Application of Appert, 434 So.2d 413 (La.1983) and Application of Megwa, 404 So.2d 1234 (La.1981).
See In re Griffiths, 413 U.S. 717, 93 S.Ct. 2851, 37 L.Ed.2d 910 (1973).
MARCUS, J., dissents from the order, being of the opinion that relators should first be qualified as a "resident alien" as defined in the immigration statutes before being admitted to the Louisiana State Bar.
In the application before us, none of the applicants are resident aliens of the United States of America. Instead they are either on student visas or work permits.
In In Re Griffiths, 413 U.S. 717, 93 S.Ct. 2851, 37 L.Ed.2d 910 (1973), applicant was a resident alien, whose application to practice before the Connecticut bar had been denied because she was not a citizen of the United States. In permitting resident aliens the right to seek admission to the bar of the State of Connecticut the court defined resident aliens as follows:
"Resident aliens, like citizens, pay taxes, support the economy, serve in the Armed Forces and contribute in myriad other ways to our society."
It did not hold that all aliens lawfully living in the United States should be permitted to take the bar examination and be permitted to practice the law of a state. In permitting a resident alien the right to take the bar examination, it simply held that:
"The Committee has not established that it must exclude all aliens from the practice of law."
I especially dissent from any opinion that would permit all persons lawfully living in the United States to become eligible...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Leclerc v. Webb, Civ.A. 03-664.
...interpreted the term "resident alien" to include foreign nationals lawfully living within the United States. See, e.g., In re Appert, 444 So.2d 1208 (La. 1984), overruled by In re Bourke, 819 So.2d 1020 (La.2002). However, in 2002, the court held that the term "resident alien" applies to al......
-
Leclerc v. Webb
...of Section 3(B), Louisiana precedent defined "resident alien" as a "foreign national[] lawfully within the United States." In re Appert, 444 So.2d 1208, 1208 (La.1984). In 2002, the Louisiana Supreme Court overturned Appert, and held that the term "resident alien . . . appl[ies] only to tho......
-
Wallace v. Calogero, Civ.A. 03-1245.
...alien" means an alien lawfully residing in the United States) overruled by In re Bourke, 819 So.2d 1020, 1022 (La.2002); In re Appert, 444 So.2d 1208, 1209 (La.1984) (stating that the Bar Committee is directed to consider foreign nationals lawfully residing in the United States as resident ......
-
In re Bourke
... ... UNDERLYING FACTS ... In July 2001, petitioner filed an application to take the Louisiana bar examination. At the time he submitted the application, petitioner resided in Australia. The Committee on Bar Admissions ... To the extent that our prior decisions, including In re: Application of Appert", 444 So.2d 1208 (La.1984), and In re: Application of Respondek, 442 So.2d 435 (La. 1983), conflict with this holding, they are hereby overruled ... \xC2" ... ...