Keeping name off bar pass list? Forum

[KJames4]

Does anyone know if it is possible to keep your name off the State's unofficial bar pass list? (Other than failing). I know some states use a numeric code to keep those who passed/failed anonymous by default. In a State that publishes a list of names of those who passed, is it possible to be excluded from that list and to just rely on the official notification that comes in the mail?

[kahechsof]

Does anyone know if it is possible to keep your name off the State's unofficial bar pass list? (Other than failing). I know some states use a numeric code to keep those who passed/failed anonymous by default. In a State that publishes a list of names of those who passed, is it possible to be excluded from that list and to just rely on the official notification that comes in the mail?

why?

[KJames4]

why?

I imagine that there are a number of reasons that one might want to take this course of action, although I concede the request is a bit strange and probably uncommon.

Perhaps the person making such a request simply doesn't want others to know if they passed?

[kahechsof]

why?

I imagine that there are a number of reasons that one might want to take this course of action, although I concede the request is a bit strange and probably uncommon.

Perhaps the person making such a request simply doesn't want others to know if they passed?

I can understand not wanting others to know if you fail. But these others won't know he took his name off the list.

[KJames4]

I can understand not wanting others to know if you fail. But these others won't know he took his name off the list.

This wouldn't be for someone who didn't want others to know if they failed, but rather for someone who didn't want others to know that they passed.

[CanadianWolf]

Has your name already been published for public comment during the "C&F" phase ? If so, how long ago ? Does your state bar seek public comment on C&F in this announcement ?

P.S. The obvious issue is: "Why?" This issue is not likely to escape the state bar when reviewing your request----which may result in your name being highlighted by larger type size & bold-faced.

[bdubs]

Don't clients have a right to know if you are licensed to practice in the state? I thought this was the primary reason for making the results public.

[CanadianWolf]

Public comment prior to being sworn-in is probably the primary reason for publication as clients can call the state bar for bar membership status.

[KJames4]

The obvious issue is: "Why?" This issue is not likely to escape the state bar when reviewing your request----which may result in your name being highlighted by larger type size & bold-faced.

The "why" is a valid question. In fact, I'd hazard a guess that 99% of folks would be so proud of passing the bar that they would want everyone to know.

However, there are people who are very private individuals, and who might not want others to know that they passed the bar.

I understand that if someone is actually admitted to the bar, that their license would be searchable in various public databases, however, the lack of a massive consolidated list makes such searches just a little less accessible to those snooping individuals who are just dying to know if a particular person passed.

[KJames4]

Don't clients have a right to know if you are licensed to practice in the state? I thought this was the primary reason for making the results public.

I know that the states that use pass lists stress that they are unofficial, and I thought that they publish them as a convenience to those who are just dying to know their results as soon as possible.

In fact, some states (like Virginia) put snide, asinine comments on their page that imply that compiling the lists is a strenuous exercise that offends the sensibilities of the bar examiners.

"As a service to Virginia Bar applicants, the Board of Bar Examiners posts the results from the most recent Bar Examination. This office is working hard on the July 2011 Bar Examination results. Provided no one calls to inquire about the results, we anticpate [sic] the results will be posted on October 14, 2011. Please do not telephone this office to inquire about the results."

I know that it is at least possible for a State to use an alternate method of publication, as West Virginia and Maryland both use numeric codes rather than publish the names. I am just curious to whether a state that publishes names would consider a request to exclude a name from the very list that they deem "unofficial" and "a service to bar applicants".

[CanadianWolf]

"Why?" Bar memership is public record.

Best to contact the state bar in question as reasons & regulations may vary among the 50 states.

[KJames4]

"Why?" Bar memership is public record.

Bar membership certainly is. The results from a particular bar exam should not be.

[CanadianWolf]

Are you worried about failing the bar exam and, therefore, not having your name published ? Otherwise, it is difficult to understand your concern unless you're concealing a character & fitness issue.

[KJames4]

Are you worried about failing the bar exam and, therefore, not having your name published ? Otherwise, it is difficult to understand your concern unless you're concealing a character & fitness issue.

Non-sequitur + false dichotomy.

Failing the bar would ensure that a name was not published, which is precisely what is being requested.
C&F is done and finished long before the published name list is released. Moreover, in the States that publish via a numeric code, there is no C&F issue.

Hence, this has nothing to do with either option listed above.

Is it really that hard to believe that someone just doesn't want their name on an unofficial list? Especially if they have no desire to practice law?

[CanadianWolf]

Yes, it is hard to believe, but, more importantly, it may raise suspicions if a reasonable explanation is not offered. But, after reading your above post, anything is plausible.

[KJames4]

Yes, it is hard to believe, but, more importantly, it may raise suspicions if a reasonable explanation is not offered. But, after reading your above post, anything is plausible.

That's a legitimate point. You are certainly right that the reaction of a state bar would be "why" and "what is your legitimate reason for such an unusual request."

So, how does one explain that they have an aversion to being put on such lists, and that they do not want to practice law?

If one tells a state bar, "Look, I have no intention of practicing law. I am going to go inactive as soon as I pass. I just want to pass the bar to keep my options open, just in case my other career goals don't work out."

Is there a better way of framing that?

[uci2013]

I can see where if someone has had a stalker in the past or been in an abusive relationship in the past where they might be very careful about what location-identifying information they might want public.