In re Dillingham
| Decision Date | 10 September 1924 |
| Docket Number | 51. |
| Citation | 124 S.E. 130,188 N.C. 162 |
| Parties | IN RE DILLINGHAM. |
| Court | North Carolina Supreme Court |
In the matter of Scott Dillingham's application for license to practice law. Application denied.
An attorney at law is a sworn officer of the court to aid in the administration of justice.
J. G Merrimon, of Ashville, for protestants.
Scott Dillingham, in pro. per.
The portions of our statute law more directly applicable to the questions presented, and appearing chiefly in Cons. Stat. c 4, provide in effect that no person shall practice law in this state without first obtaining license to do so from this court; that all examinations shall be in writing and based upon such course of study and under such rules as the court may prescribe; that all applicants who satisfy the court of their competent knowledge of the law and of their upright character shall receive license to practice in all the courts of the state. Second, that examinations for license to practice law shall be held in the city of Raleigh on Monday one week prior to the spring and fall terms of the court, respectively, and before being allowed to stand examinations each applicant must be 21 years of age or will arrive at such age before time for the next examination, and must file with the clerk a certificate of good moral character signed by two attorneys who practise in this court, and deposit the fees specified in the law.
In addition to these provisions, the rules of this court, formulated under and in furtherance of the statute, and appearing in 185 N.C. pp. 787, 788, require among other things that each applicant shall file "a certificate of the dean of a law school or a member of the bar of this court that the applicant has read law under his instruction or to his knowledge or satisfaction for two years, and upon examination by such instructor has been found competent and proficient in said course," etc.
At the time for entering on the examination of the August class, 1924, the present applicant, resident in Asheville, N. C., being among them, there appeared on our files a formal protest by prominent members of the Asheville bar against issuing a license to this applicant on the specified ground that "he is not a citizen of upright character," as contemplated and required by the law.
The class, an unusually large one, being here ready, it was considered advisable to proceed with the examination, and the applicant, having met the preliminary requirements, was allowed to take the same with the others, and, having passed a very creditable examination showing that he had a competent knowledge of the law, the question of the protest, in which a large proportion of the Ashville bar had in the meantime joined, was directly presented. Thereupon, notice having been duly issued and served on the applicant and protestants, an investigation was entered on before the court at chambers in the city of Raleigh on September 4, 1924, wherein the protestants were represented by the Hon. James G. Merrimon, designated by the Asheville bar for the purpose, and the applicant, hereafter called respondent, appeared in his own proper person.
In limine, respondent moved that he be allowed to withdraw his application, but on objection the court ruled that he, having persisted in the face of the formal protest and made and tendered for consideration his examination paper, the matter was no longer under his exclusive control, and, being of opinion that the question presented was now one in which the profession and public generally were vitally interested, directed that the hearing proceed.
Thereupon the burden being on the protestants, they offered numbers of affidavits and certifications of court records, which disclosed a series of acts by respondent in the years 1919, 1920, and 1921, amounting in many instances to violations of the criminal law, including obtaining goods by false pretense, larceny, or conspiracy to commit it, forgery, extortion, and others; all of them involving moral turpitude and showing him now utterly unworthy of the honorable and important...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Willis, In re
...the contours given to the requirement of 'good moral character' by its long usage in this State. In the case of In re Dillingham, 188 N.C. 162, 124 S.E. 130 (1924), the Court denied the applicant's application to practice law in this State because protestants filed a number of affidavits an......
-
In re West
... ... lowering of the high standard of conduct required of ... attorneys. This standard is as high in North Carolina as it ... is elsewhere. In re Applicants for License (In re Farmer; ... In re Duke), 191 N.C. 235, 131 S.E. 661; In re ... Dillingham, 188 N.C. 162, 124 S.E. 130. It is not after ... the manner of our courts, however, to deprive a lawyer, any ... more than any one else, of his constitutional guaranties or ... to revoke his license without due process of law. In re ... Stiers, supra; Committee of Grievances v. Strickland, ... ...
-
Elkins, Matter of
...In re Moore, 301 N.C. 634, 272 S.E.2d 826 (1981); In re Applicants for License, 191 N.C. 235, 131 S.E. 661 (1926); In re Dillingham, 188 N.C. 162, 124 S.E. 130 (1924); 7 Am.Jur.2d, Attorneys at Law § 16 (1980); Annot., 88 A.L.R.3d 192 (1978). Evidence of a criminal conviction is not conclus......
-
Devalle v. N.C. Sheriffs' Educ. & Training Standards Comm'n
...concluded Mr. Devalle lacked the requisite moral character. Moreover, Mr. Devalle cited our Supreme Court's decision in In re Dillingham, 188 N.C. 162 (1924), and asserted that the sanction of revocation for an indefinite period may continue only "so long as the stated deficiency exists." M......