NAAMJP v. Castille — constitutional law — affirmance — Krause
When I moved back to PA from NC back in 2008, I was admitted to practice in PA without taking the PA bar exam because I’d passed the NC bar and PA and NC have reciprocity. (Would I have moved here if I had to take the bar exam? Tough one.) Reciprocity makes sense because the effort required to re-learn areas of the law utterly irrelevant to your practice is a laborious, expensive waste for established lawyers.
Now, apparently there are some lawyers who feel especially strongly about that, and they belong to a group called the National Association for the Advancement of Multijurisdictional Practice (motto: “One bar exam is more than enough”). Said group, and two of its members from MD and NJ, sued the justices of the PA Supreme Court, alleging that PA’s lack of reciprocity with their states violates various constitutional provisions.
Alas, today NAAMJP lost on appeal, just as it had lost in district court. The opinion, appropriately, is a great little con-law refresher for those whose recollection of Conviser has dimmed.
Joining Krause are Chagares and Barry. The case was decided without argument.
For those interested, a sympathetic ABA Journal article on reciprocity challenges is here.
Mirza v. Insurance Administrator — ERISA — reversal — Fuentes
Today’s other decision is an ERISA case, and today that’s all I’ve got.