In the Matter of: Meagan Hart

Opinion

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF PENNSYLVANIA WESTERN DISTRICT

IN THE MATTER OF: MEAGAN HART, : No. 14 WM 2025 ESQUIRE MOTION FOR EXTENSION : PURSUANT TO RULE 311(G) : : : :

DISSENTING STATEMENT

JUSTICE WECHT

I note my dissent from the Court’s decision to grant the Motion for Extension of

Admission to Practice Law Pursuant to Pa.B.A.R. 311(g). I remain in the same position I

expressed in my Dissenting Statement filed at 101 WM 2024 (attached as Exhibit A) and

my Dissenting Statement to the grant of reconsideration filed at 5 WM 2025 (attached as

Exhibit B).

Pa.B.A.R. 311(g) provides that extensions may be granted to the limited admission

available pursuant to Rule 311 “for good cause shown.” “Good cause” in these

circumstances must demonstrate why the attorney could not obtain admission to the

Pennsylvania bar within the thirty-month limited admission that Rule 311 provides. As in

the prior cases, I would uphold that requirement here and deny the motion. [14 WM 2025] - 2 [14 WM 2025] - 3 [14 WM 2025] - 4