C&F - disclose even if you don't "have to"? Forum

[Blythe17]

Some people have told me that the general rule is to always disclose everything when it comes to C&F--after all, you don't want to be prevented from taking the bar only after you've already finished law school.

UMich's app seems to reflect this:

This section is required because you answered 'yes' in section Residency/Conduct to question number 4.
While answering the question below, when in doubt, err on the side of full disclosure, as the failure to fully answer any question may result in exclusion from law school or denial of the opportunity to take a state bar examination. (Please note each state has character, fitness, and other qualifications for admission to the bar; we encourage you to determine what those requirements are in any state(s) in which you are considering practicing.) If, following your completion of this application but prior to matriculation, matters arise that would require you to answer yes to the question, supplement your application with complete details. Note that an affirmative answer to either question does not necessarily preclude or even prejudice admission. Your answer will be reviewed on an individual basis in relation to all aspects of your experience, academic achievement, and potential. You must submit a supplementary statement with any affirmative responses; provide complete details, including dates and resolution.

But I still wonder, what about when you really don't have to (because, for example, the issue was expunged, etc.)--and in fact the explicitly tells you this? E.g. Harvard:

4. Have you ever been convicted of, or pled guilty or no contest to, any felony or misdemeanor, other than: 
 ...
Note that you are not required to answer “yes” to this question, or provide an explanation, if the criminal adjudication or conviction has been expunged, sealed, annulled, pardoned, destroyed, erased, impounded, or otherwise ordered by a court to be kept confidential.

Thoughts?

[AreJay711]

Just follow the rules.

But, as far as I can tell, it is highly unlikely that any discrepancy would come out in C&F review. Even if it did, I doubt straying into some gray area would prevent you from being admitted.

[MarkfromWI]

If you're really that dead set on not disclosing what ever it is you don't want to disclose, just play by the rules of the school you're applying to. Disclose to UMich, not to Harvard...

[BillsFan9907]

Disclose!

[A. Nony Mouse]

You're eliding 2 different groups - people who bend their ethnicity and people who advise full disclosure. Neither of those two things describe every law student (or prospective student).

There are also plenty of people who post here realizing they have to disclose something for the bar and that they should have disclosed it when they applied. The outcome isn't that they get screwed by C&F (assuming they do disclose appropriately), it's that they have to amend their law school application, but it's kind of a pain in the ass and could open you to further C&F scrutiny.

The thing is, bar associations value disclosure above all else. Not disclosing something in your past is almost always going to have a worse impact than whatever you did in the past (presuming it's something that's been expunged. If you served 10 years for corporate fraud or similar, not disclosing isn't going to be the issue). So you might as well get in the habit early.

(That said, if law schools have different rules, then just follow what the application asks. Tbe apps are often dictated by the expectations for the state bar - for instance, MA doesn't care about expunged convictions, so Harvard doesn't ask; MI does care, so U of Michigan asks. Obviously people at those schools don't all take the bar in MA or MI respectively, but it's the easiest way for the schools to operate.)

[valen]

I had the cops called on my for shoplifting when I was 17. I wrote the judge a letter and they dropped the charges.

Does this require disclosure? I figured it didn't but now not so sure.