Is Cornell Law's question 23 in violation of NY HRL 296.16? Forum

[dood]

...

[dramaticpaws]

Don't worry! I"m sure the fact that you're a huge douche will come across in your personal statement and they won't let you in anyway!

TITCR

[justonequestion]

...

[ArchRoark]

I have personally decided just to go ahead and fully disclose the situation on any apps that ask for it

That is what you decided; however, according to the Texas statute, the decision to reveal expunged cases remains within one's volition. I.e., if you should so choose, you are entitled to answering 'no,' and that such an answer would be deemed true in all respects except when questioned under oath in a subsequent criminal proceeding, correct?

That is my understanding of the statute. I plan to talk to my lawyer first before deciding for sure on a course of action. Texas is renown for having one of the most protective expunction statutes.

[dominkay]

Even if you're right, do you want to litigate your way into law school?

That actually sounds pretty badass.

[IBThatGuy]

You are going to be a good lawyer

Well if making things up as I go along is sufficient, it may be that all those years I spent studying philosophy were not a waste.

If that's how you do philosophy, you'll be a good sophist (and so, perhaps, a good litigator), though surely not a good philosopher.

[justonequestion]

...

[kalvano]

Kalvano and Bilbobaggins seem to be suggesting full disclosure, with the latter doing so by citing possible consequences.

If you don't disclose then the C&F portion of the bar burns you.

The end.








How many of these posts are we going to see each new cycle?

I think there were 5 or 6 last year.

Bets on how many people this cycle think they can beat the system?

[legalease9]

OP, disclose! There is likely a loophole you are missing (to be honest I don't see it either). But their probably is one. The only state I know of that has limitations on what they can ask you in regard to criminal history is Massachusetts. I love this, and hope it spreads. But in the mean time, disclose!

I do think its an interesting question though, and would love for someone with legal experience to explain what the loophole is that allows New York law schools to ask despite the language cited.

[bilbobaggins]

That is my understanding of the statute. I plan to talk to my lawyer first before deciding for sure on a course of action. Texas is renown for having one of the most protective expunction statutes.

Uh huh, so you're currently considering omitting your expunged cases and may or may not follow through pending your lawyer's recommended course of action.

So you think that, given the strength of Texas's expunction statutes, Texas courthouses will most likely not disclose the existence of the expunged records to C&F committees either of Texas or of foreign states. Correct?

That actually sounds pretty badass.

No it doesn't. I'm sure the majority of applicants would much rather get in without too much of a fuss.

Kalvano and Bilbobaggins seem to be suggesting full disclosure, with the latter doing so by citing possible consequences.

However, in an extremely similar scenario, what if an employer wanted to administer a polygraph test on an applicant? Should the applicant comply, realizing the need for cooperation, or refuse because it clearly violates EPPA (1988)?

Last time this came up, I actually tracked down case law. I'm far too lazy to do this now, but in all of the jxdns i saw, this could be an issue for the Bar C&F.

If you feel like any of these options are good, go for it:

a) You can find a plaintiff's attorney who thinks you have a cause of action (which you don't, because you haven't omitted the information and been denied either admission or bar passage) and is willing to do it for a portion of the damages (highly unlikely). Of course, this means you'll have to either get rejected from the school and/or the Bar ( means 3 years of loans and school before you'll even know).

b) Pay thousands of dollars to litigate the same issue explained in option a. This is the more likely of the two options.

c) Pay a lawyer now to advise you on what he/she thinks the state of the law is. Go on this advice.

d) Continue to argue on TLS about an area of law that you're clueless about.

[justonequestion]

...

[ArchRoark]

That is my understanding of the statute. I plan to talk to my lawyer first before deciding for sure on a course of action. Texas is renown for having one of the most protective expunction statutes.

Uh huh, so you're currently considering omitting your expunged cases and may or may not follow through pending your lawyer's recommended course of action.

So you think that, given the strength of Texas's expunction statutes, Texas courthouses will most likely not disclose the existence of the expunged records to C&F committees either of Texas or of foreign states. Correct?

I am currently leaning towards full disclosure to err on the side of caution. However, I do plan to talk to my lawyer specifically about this issue and intend to show him the range of language used in the various different applications before I turn in any law applications.

The Univ of Texas Law application explicitly states that one does not have to disclose expunged cases. IIRC When I briefly brought this subject up to my lawyer when I was originally going through this whole matter he informed me that if and when my case is expunged that I could choose not to disclose the incident on law applications but recommended me to disclose it to the Bar. However, that was awhile ago and I am not entirely sure of the exact context his answer was given in.

[bilbobaggins]

You don't understand what I'm saying: If you want to have a quasi-legal philosophical debate, go for it, but for this to even be an actionable claim (a situation where this would get resolved one way or another in court, which would give you your answer) a law school or bar would have to reject someone for not disclosing an expunged misdemeanor. You can't actually know the state of the law before this occurs.

[kalvano]

Lol 0L's who think they know more than the Bar, the state legislators, lawyers, law schools, and anyone / everyone else in the process.

[tru]

.

[Kohinoor]

That is my understanding of the statute. I plan to talk to my lawyer first before deciding for sure on a course of action. Texas is renown for having one of the most protective expunction statutes.

Uh huh, so you're currently considering omitting your expunged cases and may or may not follow through pending your lawyer's recommended course of action.

So you think that, given the strength of Texas's expunction statutes, Texas courthouses will most likely not disclose the existence of the expunged records to C&F committees either of Texas or of foreign states. Correct?

I am currently leaning towards full disclosure to err on the side of caution. However, I do plan to talk to my lawyer specifically about this issue and intend to show him the range of language used in the various different applications before I turn in any law applications.

The Univ of Texas Law application explicitly states that one does not have to disclose expunged cases. IIRC When I briefly brought this subject up to my lawyer when I was originally going through this whole matter he informed me that if and when my case is expunged that I could choose not to disclose the incident on law applications but recommended me to disclose it to the Bar. However, that was awhile ago and I am not entirely sure of the exact context his answer was given in.

The context was probably "Doing as I say gives you a fighting chance of passing C&F."

[justonequestion]

...

[capitalacq]

Enjoy dla piper, OP

[justonequestion]

...

[kalvano]

No one in the history of law school admissions before now and before you has ever thought of this or tried to get around it.

[justonequestion]

...

[sundance95]

Whether OP is right or wrong, surely there is better criticism/advice we can offer than "LOLwut u think ur special?"

From a practical standpoint, I agree with previous posters who have stated that fighting this out is a) likely not worth it, and b) is entirely hypothetical until he suffers damages such as being denied entry to LS (with the LS specifying not disclosing an arrest as the reason for denial) and thereby gains standing to file suit.

In the end, OP, if you're determined to go this route then consulting this board of aspiring attorneys is fruitless. You want a practicing attorney. It sounds as if you already have consulted with one and didn't like the advice he/she gave you. You are, of course, free to seek a second opinion, but TLS is probably not the place to do it.

[justonequestion]

...

[sundance95]

Again, don't think anyone here can help you. I also seriously doubt there's a burgeoning legal niche market in picking fights with bar associations, hence everyone telling you you are SOL. But, if you are determined, you'll need to find one.

[justonequestion]

...