In Re Dillingham's Application for License to Practice Law

124 S.E. 130, 188 N.C. 162, 1924 N.C. LEXIS 31
CourtSupreme Court of North Carolina
DecidedSeptember 10, 1924
StatusPublished
Cited by9 cases

This text of 124 S.E. 130 (In Re Dillingham's Application for License to Practice Law) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Supreme Court of North Carolina primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
In Re Dillingham's Application for License to Practice Law, 124 S.E. 130, 188 N.C. 162, 1924 N.C. LEXIS 31 (N.C. 1924).

Opinion

*163 Hoke, C. J.

Tbe portions of our statute law more directly applicable to tbe questions presented, and appearing chiefly in C. S., chap. 4, provide in effect that no person shall practice law in this State without first obtaining license to do so from this Court. That all examinations shall be in writing and based upon such course of study and under such rules as the Court may prescribe. That all applicants who satisfy the Court of their competent knowledge of the law and of their upright character shall receive license to practice in all the courts of the State.

Second, that examinations for license to practice law shall be held in the city of Ealeigh on Monday, one week prior to the Spring .and Fall Terms of the Court respectively, and before being allowed to stand examinations each applicant must be 21 years of age or will arrive at such age before time for the next examination, and must file with the clerk a certificate of good moral character signed by two attorneys who practice in this Court, and deposit the fees specified in the law.

In addition to these provisions, the rules of this Court, formulated under and in furtherance of the statute and appearing in 18S N. C., 787-788, require among other things that each applicant shall file “a certificate of the dean of a law school or a member of the bar of this Court that the applicant has read law under his instruction or to his knowledge or satisfaction for two years, and upon examination by such instructor has been found competent and proficient in said course, etc.”

At the time for entering on the examination of the August class, 1924, the present applicant, resident in Asheville, North Carolina, being among them, there appeared on our files a formal protest by prominent members of the Asheville.bar against issuing a license to this applicant on the specified ground that “he is not a citizen of upright character,” as contemplated and required by the law.

The class, an unusually large one, being here ready, it was considered advisable to proceed with the examination, and the applicant, having met the preliminary requirements, was allowed to take the same with the others, and having passed a very creditable examination showing that he had a competent knowledge of the law, the question of the *164 protest, in wbicb a large proportion of tbe Asheville bar bad in the meantime joined, was directly presented. Thereupon, notice having been duly issued and served on the applicant and protestants, an investigation was entered on before the Court at chambers in the city of Raleigh on 4 September^ 1924, wherein the protestants were represented by the Hon. James Or. Merrimon, designated by the Asheville bar for the purpose, and the applicant, hereafter called respondent, appeared in his own proper person.

In limine, 'respondent moved that he be allowed to withdraw his application, but on objection the Court ruled that he having persisted in the face of the formal protest and made and tendered for consideration his examination paper, the matter was no longer under his exclusive control, and being of opinion that the question presented was now one in which the profession and public generally were vitally interested, directed that the hearing proceed.

Thereupon, the burden being on the protestants, they offered numbers of affidavits and certifications, of court records which disclosed a series of acts by respondent in the years 1919, 1920 and 1921, amounting in many instances to violations of the criminal law, including obtaining goods by false pretense, larceny, or conspiracy to commit it, forgery, extortion and others, all of them involving moral turpitude and showing him now utterly unworthy of the honorable and important position to which he aspires.

The respondent makes no substantial denial of these charges, but claims they were incident to or connected with respondent’s failure in business at the times referred to and all occurred prior to the year 1922. That in this latter year, having become convinced of the error of his ways, he turned from his evil practices and has since demeaned himself as a good citizen. In support of this claim he offered a 'certificate of date, May, 1924, signed by several prominent citizens of Ashe-ville and vicinity, some of them holding official position there, to the effect that for the past twelve months the respondent had been actively engaged in business in the city of Asheville, and that having occasion daily to observe him, they cheerfully certify to his good conduct during that time and give it as their decided opinion that he is rapidly regaining the position of respect and confidence which he formerly held in the community, and that the signers confidently feel that he is now making a good citizen of his county and State, etc. Respondent then closed his statement with the assertion that whether a license be granted him or not, he intends to persist in his present course of well doing.

In regard to this certificate, it was pertinently suggested by protestants that same, restricted in its terms, was given in reference to respondent’s *165 recent conviction in tbe courts of Tennessee of conspiracy to violate tbe Federal Automobile Tbeft Act, and with tbe view of affecting a mitigation of bis punishment, a time and occasion when men rarely refuse to do what is permissible to aid a human being in distress, but neither tbe certificate presented, nor tbe closing statement of respondent’s purpose, commendable as it is, suffice as an assurance to us that be has tbe upright character required for lawful issuance of this license.

“Character,” said IVIr. Erskine in tbe trial of Thomas Hardy for high treason, “is tbe slow-spreading influence of opinion arising from tbe deportment of a man in society, as a man’s deportment, good or bad, necessarily produces one circle without another and so extends itself till it unites in one general opinion.”

Even more is this true when tbe effort is a restoration of a character which has been deservedly forfeited. It then is a question of time and growth.

An attorney at law is a sworn officer of the court to aid in the administration of justice. He is sought as counselor, and his advice followed in the most important and intimate relations of life. There is doubt if any profession affords an equal opportunity for fixing the standards and directing the civic conduct of his fellows. It is of supreme importance, therefore, that one who aspires to this high position should be of upright character and should hold, and deserve to hold, the confidence of the community where he lives and works. Eor this honorable association the respondent has not qualified himself, in fact or law, and we are all of opinion that his application for license be denied.

In the course of the hearing it was disclosed that only by the merest chance was the fact of the present application made known.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Related

Devalle v. N.C. Sheriffs' Educ. & Training Standards Comm'n
Court of Appeals of North Carolina, 2023
In Re Wright
690 P.2d 1134 (Washington Supreme Court, 1984)
Matter of Elkins
302 S.E.2d 215 (Supreme Court of North Carolina, 1983)
In Matter of Rogers
253 S.E.2d 912 (Supreme Court of North Carolina, 1979)
In Re Willis
215 S.E.2d 771 (Supreme Court of North Carolina, 1975)
Baker v. Varser
82 S.E.2d 90 (Supreme Court of North Carolina, 1954)
In Re Disabarment of West
193 S.E. 134 (Supreme Court of North Carolina, 1937)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
124 S.E. 130, 188 N.C. 162, 1924 N.C. LEXIS 31, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/in-re-dillinghams-application-for-license-to-practice-law-nc-1924.