Archives for October 2017

BAR ADMISSION: Request by non-attorney licensed to practice in Blackfeet Tribal Court to sit for exam denied… order.

Jerry O’Neil requests “an exception to the existing rules concerning eligibility” to take the bar exam. He asserts that besides being licensed to practice in Blackfeet Tribal Court, he “has the necessary attitude to fight for my clients and the public” and “considers it a privilege to advocate for justice for all, including the oppressed, in both our political and legal systems.” He cites as examples of his “disposition to fight for justice” his serving as a State Senator and State Representative 2001-14 and successfully defending his client against a partner assault complaint filed in Tribal Court by the son of the Chief Prosecutor despite suffering disbarment for a year before being reinstated by Tribal Court of Appeals. He cites numerous CLE credits and “enough trial and appellate court experience in tribal and state courts to adequately represent clients” and asserts that “through helping his family and others he has built up an extensive legal background.” He cites a $1 million verdict he won representing himself and his 5 children against “an overzealous religion in Idaho.” O’Neil v. Schuckardt (Ida. 1989). Although the case ultimately was remanded for retrial in which he had to retain an attorney to represent the children and resulted in a verdict of less than $5,000 plus a settlement of $10,000 for each child, “the lawsuit was of benefit because it caused the defendants to quit doing their harmful actions to O’Neil’s family and to other families” and helped the children pay for their higher education. He asserts that after successfully defending his own family, he has made a career of helping others maintain relationships with their children as a mediator, independent paralegal, tribal attorney, and legislator.

O’Neil sets forth Rule of Admission I.C.2, but does not indicate that he has obtained “a Juris Doctor from a law school accredited by the American Bar Association at the time of graduation,” so we assume that he does not have such a degree and seeks a waiver of this requirement. He does not assert that he is an attorney admitted to practice “in another state, district, or territory of the United States,” and offers no statement or argument that his licensure by the Tribal Court satisfies the requirement to be “an attorney” admitted to practice in another “state, district, or territory of the United States,” and thus we assume that he seeks waiver of these requirements as well.

The Court is authorized to make rules for “admission to the bar and the conduct of its members.” Art. VII, §2(3). It is “the final authority as to whether an applicant may be admitted to practice law in Montana,” and may waive any admission requirement if appropriate under the circumstances. Rule XI.A.

The Rules of Admission are carefully crafted to govern the admission process, promote admission of qualified applicants, and protect public interests. Rarely do we waive the rule that exam applicants graduate from schools approved by the ABA at the time of their graduation. Recently when this was waived, the applicants were attorneys who had passed exams in other states and successfully practiced law, but whose schools were not accredited by the ABA at the time of their graduation.

O’Neil is not an attorney. He has not passed a bar exam or graduated from a school accredited by the ABA. The circumstances do not merit waiver of the Rules for him to sit for the exam.

The full Court.

Matter of O’Neil, PR 06-422, 10/24/17.

Jerry O’Neil, Columbia Falls, pro se.