Berman v. Florida Bd. of Bar Examiners, 86-5044
| Decision Date | 25 July 1986 |
| Docket Number | No. 86-5044,86-5044 |
| Citation | 794 F.2d 1529 |
| Parties | Edwin M. BERMAN, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. FLORIDA BOARD OF BAR EXAMINERS, Lewis M. Kanner, Chairman, Defendant-Appellee. |
| Court | U.S. Court of Appeals — Eleventh Circuit |
Bernard Berman, Ft. Lauderdale, Fla., for plaintiff-appellant.
C. Graham Carothers, Ausley, McMullen, McGehee, Carothers, & Proctor, Tallahassee, Fla., for defendant-appellee.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern District of Florida.
Before HILL and VANCE, Circuit Judges, and BROWN *, Senior Circuit Judge.
In this appeal, we must determine whether the District Court erred in holding that it had no subject matter jurisdiction over appellant's Sec. 1983 suit which alleged that his federal rights were violated when the Supreme Court of Florida denied his Petition for a Rule to Show Cause why he should not be admitted to the Florida bar.
Because appellant's suit is in reality a challenge to a state court judicial proceeding concerning the denial of a particular application for admission to the Florida Bar, we hold that his claim is within the jurisdiction of the United States Supreme Court rather than the original jurisdiction of the District Court. The District Court's judgment is therefore affirmed.
Plaintiff-Appellant Edwin Berman is an attorney entitled to practice law in Illinois and a judge of the Circuit Court of Cook County. Berman received a law degree from the University of Miami School of Law issued to him in 1982, nunc pro tunc to 1952. In June, 1984, he filed a request with the Florida Board of Bar Examiners to be admitted to the Florida bar without sitting for the bar exam. His request was made pursuant to a statutory "Diploma Privilege" waiving the bar exam requirement for graduates of Florida law schools. The relevant statute was in effect in 1952, but has since been repealed. Berman's request for admission under the "Diploma Privilege" was denied on October 16, 1984, and he subsequently filed a Petition for a Rule to Show Cause with the Florida Supreme Court. The Florida Board of Bar Examiners filed a response in the Supreme Court of Florida which contained legal argument addressed to Berman's "Diploma Privilege" claims. Berman's petition was denied without opinion or statement of reasons.
Thereafter, Berman brought this Sec. 1983 action in federal district court alleging constitutional violations in connection with the denial of his bar application. The District Court ruled that it lacked subject matter jurisdiction over Berman's complaint since the complaint was, in essence, an effort to have an "inferior" federal court review the decision of the state supreme court. This appeal followed, and we affirm.
For purposes of subject matter jurisdiction, the Supreme Court has recognized a critical distinction among cases brought in federal district court by disgruntled state bar applicants. See D.C. Court of Appeals v. Feldman, 460 U.S. 462, 103 S.Ct. 1303, 75 L.Ed.2d 206 (1983). In essence, there are two types of claims which a frustrated bar applicant might bring in federal court:
(1) A constitutional challenge to a state's general rules and procedures governing admission to the state's bar; or
(2) A claim, based on constitutional or other grounds, that a state...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Zisser v. the Fla. Bar
...and depth of a state court decision when determining the applicability of Rooker–Feldman. For example, in Berman v. Florida Board of Bar Examiners, 794 F.2d 1529 (11th Cir.1986), the plaintiff, an out-of-state attorney seeking to avoid “the Horrors of the Bar Exam,” filed a request that the......
-
Target Media Partners v. Specialty Mktg. Corp.
...appeals from particular state court adjudications but not over challenges to general rules and procedures. See Berman v. Fla. Bd. of Bar Exam'rs , 794 F.2d 1529 (11th Cir. 1986) ; Kirkpatrick v. Shaw , 70 F.3d 100, 102 (11th Cir. 1995). Even if the general subject matter of the instant suit......
-
Williams v. State Attorney Office, CASE NO. 8:17-cv-367-T-23MAP
...his claim and thereby obtain collateral review in federal court of the state court decision. Berman v. Florida Bd. of Bar Examiners, 794 F.2d 1529 (11th Cir. 1986).A federal district court lacks jurisdiction to adjudicate "cases brought by state-court losers complaining of injuries caused b......
-
Washington v. Reynolds, Civ. Act. No. 2:12-CV-545-WHA
...decisions of a state court is merely a prohibited appeal of the state court judgment); see also cf. Berman v. Florida Board of Bar Examiners, 794 F.2d 1529 (11th Cir. 1986); Rolleston v. Eldridge, 848 F.2d 163 (11th Cir. 1988). Likewise, a 42 U.S.C. § 1983 action may not be used to compel a......