October 31, 2011
 
 
Music and Wine at Anthology - November 3, 2011
November Brown Bag Program - Hot Topics in the Regulation of Pharmaceuticals and Medical Devices: Challenges or Opportunities?
November MCLE - Recent Developments in Labor and Employment Law
December Brown Bag Program - Who Wants to Be a (Millionaire) California Lawyer? Ethical Issues Facing California In House Counsel
Real Estate Roundtable - Real Estate Acquisition Due Diligence Checklists: Recommendations for both Buyers and Sellers
M&A Roundtable - Negotiating Successful M&A Transactions: Lessons from the Psychology of Decision Making
Meet Your Counterpart - 2012 Compensation Trends For Legal Professionals
Meet Your Counterpart - Consulting as a Career
Temecula Valley Wine Tour and MCLE
Small Law Club Meeting - Roundtable Discussion on 1) Metrics for Best Practices in Setting up Compliance Programs, and 2) Cost Cutting Trends and Effective Solutions Instead of Headcount Reductions
Partnering Program for In-Transition Attorneys - NEW!
Job List - October 31, 2011
Legal Practice Committees - Roundtable Discussion Groups
Project Attorneys – NOW!
Did You Miss the Last Program? Program Materials are Available On Line
Multijurisdictional Practice Update From NAAMJP
 
 
 
 

Multijurisdictional Practice Update From NAAMJP

The National Association for the Advancement of Multijurisdiction Practice filed a Complaint in the Northern District of California NAAMJP v. California Supreme Court 11-5046 SBA petitioning to have all restrictions on California registered in-house counsel removed and that they be converted to full licensure in light of  Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission, 130 S.Ct. 876 (2010) holding corporations have First Amendment rights and  “Any effort by the Judiciary to decide which means of communications are to be preferred for the particular type of message and speaker would raise questions as to the courts' own lawful authority.”  


     The lawsuit further argues that the California experienced attorneys’ bar exam should be invalidated.  The Complaint alleges that five nationally respected testing experts have concluded the California bar exam for experienced sister-state attorneys is neither a valid or reliable test.  Testing experts and statisticians have developed what is termed a standard error of measurement. The Complaint alleges that standard error of measurement for the experienced attorneys’ exam is over 50%.


     The Complaint further requests the California Supreme Court to adopt the ABA 20/20 Commission’s recommendation that all attorneys with three years of experience be provided full admission on motion privileges without taking another bar exam.  The ABA 20/20 Commission concluded that 65,000 attorneys have been admitted to the bar of another State on motion in 39 States during the last ten years.  It further urged all States to adopt its recommendation.  It concluded that there is no reason to conclude that an attorney with three years of experience will be any less competent then a newly minted attorney.  


     The NAAMJP further argues citing Citizens United that in this Information Age and global economy requiring experienced attorneys to reinvent the wheel makes as much sense as licensing printing presses in the 16th Century.  A copy of the complaint can be found at http://www.mjplaw.org/pending_litigation.html . Check out our web page at www.mjplaw.org, it has much more detailed information about the organization.
     
     Feel free to contact us either via email or phone, our contact information is below.
     
     Sincerely,
      
     Grant Savoy
          NAAMJP
          310.207.1776
     213.840.7234
         
grant@mjplaw.org

 
Share: LinkedIn Twitter Facebook