UBE Transfer Scores And “Admitted By Examination”

The Georgia Supreme Court admitted an attorney without examination despite an unfavorable recommendation of its Board of Bar Examiners

Barry Dean Carothers appeals the decision of the Georgia Board of Bar Examiners denying his motion for admission to the State Bar of Georgia on motion without examination. Because we agree with Carothers that the Board erred by concluding that he has not been “admitted by examination” to the bar of a reciprocal jurisdiction, we reverse the Board’s decision.

The peripatetic attorney

Carothers was admitted to the Florida Bar by examination in 1990. He was also later admitted by motion (without examination) to the bars of Connecticut, Massachusetts, Vermont, and West Virginia. Then, in February 2020, Carothers took the Uniform Bar Examination (“UBE”) in South Carolina and received a score of 267.1 Based on that examination score and his completion of that state’s other admission requirements, he was admitted to the South Carolina Bar. Carothers also applied for admission to the Alabama Bar by transferring his score on the same UBE. Because he met Alabama’s UBE score requirement and completed the state’s other admission requirements, he was admitted to the Alabama Bar in January 2021.

Editor’s note: That’s a heavy dose of annual dues!

The issue is whether an admission based on a transferred UBE score is considered as “with” or “without” examination

The court rejected the Board’s various arguments

Part B, Section 6 (a) does not actually mandate that applicants be physically present in Georgia when they take the Georgia bar examination; it says that the exam will be administered “in Atlanta or such other location as the Board may designate.” (Emphasis added.) In fact, due to the coronavirus pandemic, the Board designated the last three Georgia bar examinations to be administered remotely, meaning that applicants could take the exam from anywhere the internet reaches. See, e.g., July Bar Exam to be Remote, https://www.gasupreme.us/july-2021-bar-exam/. So the Board’s assertion that Georgia has an inflexible in-state examination requirement for our own bar exam is incorrect.

Neither Carothers nor the Georgia Bar contends that he met the criteria for admission to the Alabama Bar without examination. Instead, he followed the requirements for admission by  examination: he took the UBE, which is the bar examination used by Alabama; he achieved a passing score under the Alabama Rules; he timely transferred that score to Alabama; and he successfully completed the other requirements for admission by examination. Thus, under the plain language of the Alabama Rules, Carothers was “admitted by examination” to the Alabama Bar.

…But the Board’s over-reading of these Part B rules is really beside the point, because where to administer the Georgia bar examination and whether to use transferred scores for the Georgia bar examination are rules found in Part B about the Georgia bar examination – an examination that is not at issue in this case, in which Carothers seeks to be admitted to the Georgia Bar under Part C on motion without taking the Georgia bar examination.

Conclusion

As currently formulated, the plain language of the Georgia Rules does not require that every reciprocal jurisdiction’s standards for “admission by examination” mirror Georgia’s. Nor do our rules state or imply that differences, such as allowing the use of certain transferred exam scores, will render another jurisdiction’s process for admission by examination invalid. In short, the rule in Part C allowing admission to the Georgia Bar on motion credits the examination processes of the jurisdictions with which Georgia has reciprocity, and the Board has no authority to alter or disregard that rule. 

As made clear above, Carothers met Alabama’s requirements to be “admitted by examination” to the Alabama Bar, and he thereby fulfilled the requirement in Part C, Section 2 (b) of the Georgia Rules that he be “admitted by examination” to the bar of a state with which Georgia has reciprocity for purposes of bar admissions. Accordingly, we reverse the Board’s decision denying Carothers’s motion for admission to the Georgia Bar without examination.

Justice McMillian dissented and is joined by two colleagues

At its essence, the majority’s analysis focuses on the dictionary definition of “examination,” looks at the Alabama Rules, and concludes that because the UBE falls under the dictionary definition of “examination” under the Alabama Rules, then Carothers was admitted by examination. The fallacy of this reasoning, however, is that the majority construes the phrase “admitted by examination” in the context of Alabama’s bar examination requirements. Instead, the question should be how Georgia defines “admitted by examination” in the context of its own Rules. A review of that phrase as used in the Georgia Rules shows that it is a term of art referring to admission by examination akin to the type of examination that Georgia requires.

(Mike Frisch)