In the Matter of Barry Dean Carothers

863 S.E.2d 35, 312 Ga. 393
CourtSupreme Court of Georgia
DecidedSeptember 8, 2021
DocketS21Z0781
StatusPublished

This text of 863 S.E.2d 35 (In the Matter of Barry Dean Carothers) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Supreme Court of Georgia primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
In the Matter of Barry Dean Carothers, 863 S.E.2d 35, 312 Ga. 393 (Ga. 2021).

Opinion

312 Ga. 393 FINAL COPY

S21Z0781. IN THE MATTER OF BARRY DEAN CAROTHERS.

PER CURIAM.

Barry Dean Carothers appeals the decision of the Georgia

Board of Bar Examiners denying his motion for admission to the

State Bar of Georgia on motion without examination. Because we

agree with Carothers that the Board erred by concluding that he has

not been “admitted by examination” to the bar of a reciprocal

jurisdiction, we reverse the Board’s decision.

1. Background.

Carothers was admitted to the Florida Bar by examination in

1990. He was also later admitted by motion (without examination)

to the bars of Connecticut, Massachusetts, Vermont, and West

Virginia. Then, in February 2020, Carothers took the Uniform Bar

Examination (“UBE”) in South Carolina and received a score of 267.1

1 The UBE is a uniformly administered, graded, and scored bar Based on that examination score and his completion of that state’s

other admission requirements, he was admitted to the South

Carolina Bar. Carothers also applied for admission to the Alabama

Bar by transferring his score on the same UBE. Because he met

Alabama’s UBE score requirement and completed the state’s other

admission requirements, he was admitted to the Alabama Bar in

January 2021.

Carothers then applied to be admitted to the Georgia Bar on

motion without examination based on Georgia’s reciprocity with

Alabama for bar admissions purposes. The Georgia Board denied his

examination that results in a score that is portable, or transferable, between the jurisdictions using the UBE. See Chart 5: Uniform Bar Examination Jurisdictions – Admission by Examination or by Transferred UBE Score, https://reports.ncbex.org/comp-guide/charts/chart-5 (hereafter “Chart 5”). The UBE includes the Multistate Essay Examination, the Multistate Performance Test (“MPT”), and the Multistate Bar Examination (“MBE”). See Understanding the Uniform Bar Examination, https://www.ncbex.org/pdfviewer/?file=%2Fdmsdocument%2F209. The UBE is used or will soon be used in 40 states and territories. See Chart 5. Each UBE jurisdiction sets its own passing score (varying from 260 to 280) and determines how long a UBE score remains eligible for transfer (varying from two years to five years). See id. All websites referenced in this opinion were last visited on August 27, 2021.

2 application on February 8, 2021, on the ground he had not been

“admitted by examination” to membership in the bar of a jurisdiction

that has reciprocity with Georgia, citing Part C, Section 2 (b) of this

Court’s Rules Governing Admission to the Practice of Law (“Georgia

Rules”). See In the Matter of O’Neal, 304 Ga. 449, 451 (819 SE2d 1)

(2018) (“This Court has the inherent and exclusive power to

prescribe requirements for admission to the practice of law in order

to promote the State’s fundamental interest in ensuring that

members of the legal profession are competent.”).2 Carothers

appeals that decision.

2. The Georgia Rule for Admission on Motion.

Part C of the Georgia Rules allows applicants to be admitted to

the Georgia Bar on motion rather than by passing the Georgia bar

examination if they meet certain requirements. The only

requirement at issue in this case mandates that the applicant

[h]as been admitted by examination to membership in the bar of the highest court of another United States

2 The Georgia Rules can be found online at https://www.gabaradmissions.org/rules-governing-admission. 3 jurisdiction which has reciprocity for bar admissions purposes with the State of Georgia[.]

Georgia Rules Part C, Section 2 (b).3 It is undisputed that Carothers

3 Part C, Section 2 says in full:

In order to petition the Board of Bar Examiners to be admitted without examination, an attorney licensed in a state other than Georgia must meet the following eligibility criteria. The attorney: (a) Must meet the educational eligibility requirements established in Part B, Section 4 of these Rules, including holding a first professional degree in law (JD or LL.B) from a law school approved by the American Bar Association; (b) Has been admitted by examination to membership in the bar of the highest court of another United States jurisdiction which has reciprocity for bar admissions purposes with the State of Georgia; provided, however, that if the former jurisdiction of the applicant permits the admission of Georgia judges and lawyers upon motion but that jurisdiction’s rules are more stringent and exacting and contain other limitations, restrictions and conditions, the admission of the applicant from that jurisdiction shall be governed by the same rules that would apply to an applicant from Georgia seeking admission to the Bar in the applicant’s former jurisdiction; (c) Has never been denied certification of fitness to practice law in Georgia or any other state; (d) Has never taken and failed the Georgia Bar Examination or the Georgia Attorneys’ Examination; (e) Has been primarily engaged in the active practice of law for five of the seven years immediately preceding the date upon which the application is filed; (f) Is currently or resigned while in good professional standing in every jurisdiction in which the applicant has been licensed to practice law; (g) Must receive Certification of Fitness to Practice Law in Georgia from the Board to Determine Fitness of Bar Applicants. (h) Must state that he or she intends to engage in the

4 has been admitted to the bar of the highest court of Alabama and

that Alabama is a jurisdiction which has reciprocity with Georgia

for bar admissions purposes.4 The Board contends, however, that

Carothers was not “admitted by examination” to the Alabama Bar.

In considering the meaning of bar admission rules, we must

afford the text its “‘plain and ordinary meaning,’” view it “in the

context in which it appears,” and read it “in its most natural and

reasonable way, as an ordinary speaker of the English language

would.” Deal v. Coleman, 294 Ga. 170, 172-173 (751 SE2d 337)

(2013) (citation omitted). See also City of Guyton v. Barrow, 305 Ga.

799, 805 (828 SE2d 366) (2019) (noting that statutory interpretation

principles from Deal “apply to all positive legal rules”). We begin

with the recognition that the Uniform Bar Examination is

undeniably an “examination” under the ordinary meaning of that

practice of law in Georgia. (i) Must state that he or she has not engaged in the unauthorized practice of law in Georgia. 4 For a list of the 42 jurisdictions with which Georgia has reciprocity, see

https://www.gabaradmissions.org/appinfo.action?id=3. Georgia does not have reciprocity with Florida or South Carolina. 5 word. See, e.g., The American Heritage Dictionary of English

Language 618 (4th ed. 2000) (defining “examination” as “[a] set of

questions or exercises testing knowledge or skill”). So the question

is whether Carothers was “admitted by” this examination “to

membership in the bar [of the reciprocal state].” Because we must

determine how Carothers was admitted to the Alabama Bar, we

must look to the Rules Governing Admission to the Alabama State

Bar (“Alabama Rules”).5

3. The Alabama Rules.

Applicants may be admitted to the Alabama Bar without

examination and by examination. As discussed below, under the

Alabama Rules, Alabama’s bar examination consists of the UBE,

and applicants may take the UBE in Alabama or take the

examination in a different jurisdiction and transfer the score they

receive.

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

Related

Deal v. Coleman
751 S.E.2d 337 (Supreme Court of Georgia, 2013)
In re O'Neal
819 S.E.2d 1 (Supreme Court of Georgia, 2018)
City of Guyton v. Barrow
828 S.E.2d 366 (Supreme Court of Georgia, 2019)
In the Matter of Harriet O'neal
304 Ga. 449 (Supreme Court of Georgia, 2018)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
863 S.E.2d 35, 312 Ga. 393, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/in-the-matter-of-barry-dean-carothers-ga-2021.