In re Bonam

Citation255 Mich. 59,237 N.W. 45
PartiesIn re BONAM.
Decision Date16 June 1931
CourtSupreme Court of Michigan
OPINION TEXT STARTS HERE

In the matter of the application of Roy W. Bonam for a certificate of admission to the bar.

Application denied without prejudice.

PER CURIAM.

Plaintiff asks this court to grant him a certificate of admission to practice as an attorney and counselor at law and in chancery in the Supreme Court of the state as of September 24, 1925.

Plaintiff passed examination before the board of law examiners, and September 24, 1925, was admitted to practice by the circuit court of Wayne county.

The statute, section 13578, Comp. Laws 1929, provides that one otherwise qualified may be admitted to practice as an attorney and counselor in all the courts of record of this state on motion made in the Supreme Court or any circuit court of the state, upon producing the certificate required by law. The statute further provides: ‘In case of admission to practice otherwise than on motion made in the supreme court, no person shall be entitled to practice as an attorney and counselor in the courts of this state until he files with the clerk of the supreme court his affidavit showing his name, residence, citizenship and the court by which he was admitted to practice in this state, together with a certified copy of the order upon which the admission was made.'

This statute further provides: ‘The clerk of the supreme court shall prepare and keep a register of attorneys and counselors authorized to practice law in this state, as appears from the records in his office, and shall file and preserve the affidavits herein provided for, and enter from time to time on the said official register the names of persons who have complied with the terms of this act, and have become attorneys and counselors entitled to practice law in this state.'

The statute also provides: ‘Said register of attorneys and counselors is declared to be a public record, and after January one (1), nineteen hundred twenty-five (1925), shall be conclusive evidence that the persons therein named (and none others) are attorneys and counselors in the courts of record in this state.'

Plaintiff did not comply with the provisions of the statute providing that before he shall be entitled to practice he shall file with the clerk of the Supreme Court the affidavit prescribed by the statute until May 15, 1931.

The Legislature, in the exercise of the police power, has prescribed the rules and regulations contained in the statute...

To continue reading

Request your trial
6 cases
  • Application of Kaufman
    • United States
    • United States State Supreme Court of Idaho
    • May 16, 1949
    ...... Grievance. Committee of State Bar of Texas, Twenty-First. Congressional District v. Dean, 1945, Tex.Civ.App., 190. S.W.2d 126; Detroit Bar Ass'n v. Union Guardian Trust. Co., 1937, 282 Mich. 707, 281 N.W. 432; Opinion of. Justices, 1935, 289 Mass. 607, 194 N.E. 313; In re Bonam,. 1931, 255 Mich. 59, 237 N.W. 45. . . Robert. E. Brown, Kellogg, J. L. Eberle, Boise, V. K. Jeppesen,. Nampa, for Board of Commissioners of Idaho State Bar. . . The. admission or exclusion of attorneys to practice is not the. exercise of the mere ministerial power, ......
  • Creditors' Serv. Corp. v. Cummings
    • United States
    • United States State Supreme Court of Rhode Island
    • February 4, 1937
    ...v. Automobile Service Association, supra; State v. Cannon, 206 Wis. 374, 240 N.W. 441; Opinion of the Justices, supra; In re Bonam, 255 Mich. 59, 237 N.W. 45; People v. People's Stock Yards State Bank, 344 Ill. 462, 176 N.E. What constitutes the practice of law is extremely difficult, if no......
  • In re Bozarth
    • United States
    • Supreme Court of Oklahoma
    • December 15, 1936
    ......665, 34 N.E. 641, 21. L.R.A. 701; Hanson v. Grattan, 84 Kan. 843, 115 P. 646, 34 L.R.A. (N.S.) 240; In re Casebier, 129 Kan. 853, 284 P. 611; Ex parte Steckler, 179 La. 410, 419, 154 So. 41; Opinion of the Justices to the Senate, 279 Mass. 607, 180. N.E. 725, 81 A.L.R. 1059; In re Bonam, 255 Mich. 59,. 237 N.W. 45; In re Greathouse, 189 Minn. 51, 248. N.W. 735; In re Richards, 333 Mo. 907, 63 S.W.2d. 672; In re Branch, 70 N.J.Law, 537, 57 A. 431;. In re Eaton, 60 N.D. 580, 235 N.W. 587; State. Bar Comm. ex rel. Williams v. Sullivan, 35 Okl. 745, 131. P. 703, L.R.A.1915D, ......
  • In re Bozarth, Case Number: 26484
    • United States
    • Supreme Court of Oklahoma
    • December 15, 1936
    ...Steckler, 179 La. 419, 154 So. 41; Opinion of the Justices to the Senate, 279 Mass. 607, 180 N.E. 725, 81 A. L. R. 1059; In re Bonam, 255 Mich. 59, 237 N.W. 45; In re Greathouse, 189 Minn. 51, 248 N.W. 785; In re Richards, 333 Mo. 907, 63 S.W.2d 672; In re Blanch, 70 N.J.L. 537, 57 A. 431; ......
  • Request a trial to view additional results

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT