Read More of the latest news on our
MJP Blawg.
Click here for
information about our Directors.
One Bar Exam Is More Than Enough
The
NAAMJP is a public benefit corporation founded
by attorneys for the benefit of attorneys
seeking to obtain bar admission in another
State or U.S. District Court without taking
another bar exam.
The ABA MJP Commission has concluded
that one bar exam is more than enough almost
10 years ago.
We are actively petitioning for the
equivalent of a driver’s license for lawyers.
We seek the same rights to interstate travel that
lawyers in the EU and Canada already possess.
Our
founding fathers brought forth a new nation
conceived in liberty and dedicated to the
proposition that all men are created equal.
If all men and women are created equal,
and American lawyers are men and women, than
all American lawyers are created equal.
The issue the NAAMJP is litigating is
whether the equal rights, privileges and
immunities inherent in bar admission on
motion, which the United States Supreme Court
has squarely held is a constitutionally
protected privilege and immunity, Supreme
Court of Virginia v. Friedman, 487 U.S. 59
(1988), and has been adopted in 39 States,
resulting in the admission on motion of over
60,000 attorneys, should be provided to all
American attorneys.
That is one nation under God with
liberty and justice for all.
In our lawsuit challenging the California Supreme
Court bar admission rules, we request every
registered in-house counsel and legal services
attorneys be converted to full licensure and
that the sister-state attorney bar exam be
abolished.
We also petitioned that every District
Court in the Ninth Circuit provide reciprocal
general admission to all sister-state
attorneys.
Other lawsuits are being filed. When
Brown v. Board of Education was decided the
Supreme Court consolidated seven test cases.
We ask you to join us and contribute to
finance this national precedent setting
litigation that is designed to bring an end to
the separate but equal era for lawyers.
The
NAAMJP goal is to have obtained full admission
on motion privileges for all attorneys by the
end of 2013 in all U.S. District Courts and
State Supreme Courts that do not presently
provide equal privileges and immunities,
including the tit-for-tat admission rules that
provide you get admission on motion in our
jurisdiction if our attorneys get admission on
motion in your jurisdiction.
The
NAAMJP has already filed suit on behalf of multiple
highly competent experienced attorneys who
have been stripped of their law license based
on the whim of local licensing officials
implementing archaic policies, similar to the
licensing of printing presses in the 16th
Century, that serve no purpose in the 21st
Century other than decreasing competition and
providing monopoly protection.
See
our Pending Litigation Page.
Plaintiff KIMBERLY JANE ALFRIEND
was a “registered legal services attorney”
employed by the Children’s Law Center (CLC) of
Los Angeles under California Rule 9.45.
She completed a rigorous rite of
passage including ABA law school graduation
for entry into the legal profession.
She is admitted to the bar of the
Maryland Supreme Court, but she is
not
admitted in California.
She forfeited her privilege and
immunity under Rule 9.45 and is categorically
ineligible to appear in a California courtroom
on behalf of CLC and the indigent — after
three years as a “registered legal services
attorney.”
It is arbitrary and irrational to
conclude that an attorney somehow becomes
categorically disqualified with three years of
experience as a registered legal services
attorney, but is categorically qualified
before reaching three years.
Rule 9.45. is not related to public
protection. It is monopoly protection.
She is thus no longer one of small
number (16) of registered local services
attorneys in a state with 35 million people.
Plaintiff DAWN BERTUCCI
passed bar exams in Maryland and New York.
She has been a lawyer in good standing
since 1998.
Like thousands of other women, she
moved across State lines to further her
(physician) husband’s career.
She was recently divorced and has two
children six and eight.
She has been failed on the California
bar exam three times.
This is a test that five nationally
respected testing experts have concluded fails
to meet testing Standards, and it is not a
valid or reliable test.
See our Blog Bar Examiners on Steroids.
The last time Dawn took the test, she
became sick and exhausted during the middle of
it and was forced to withdraw. It is
physically impossible for her to go thru this
ordeal as a single mom with two children at
home.
Dawn is left with the Hobson’s choice of
either giving up being a lawyer or a mother.
If you are California registered
in-house counsel this could be you.
The NAAMJP has had
numerous in-house counsel members who have
unfortunately disappeared. Under California
Rule 9.46, the corporate in-house counsel like
the registered legal services attorney, pays
the same dues, must comply with the same CLE
requirements, and must be licensed in another
jurisdiction.
In-house counsel is
registered in perpetuity, but 30 days after
they lose their employment, the attorney is
deleted from the rolls. Many in-house
positions are terminated for business reasons
such as merger. Rule 9.46 does not facilitate
public protection when counsel has already
been licensed. It is a bar admission rule that
perpetuates the status quo long after the quo
has lost it status.
"He who looks upon a conflict between right and wrong, and does not help the right against the wrong, despises and insults his own nature, and invites the contempt of mankind." - Frederick Douglass
COUNSEL
BENJAMIN DAI, studied Social Ecology, counseling
and psycho-neurobiology in the University of
California system. He attended Southwestern Law
School and was admitted to the California
State Bar in 1991. He established his practice
in the San Francisco Bay area in the areas of
civil rights, constitutional law,
discrimination, medical and products
liability.
He provided free legal
services via the San Francisco Bar
Association's Volunteer Legal Services Program
for three years. In 1993, he was awarded the
Manuel W. Wiley Award for providing Pro Bono
services to the poor by the California Bar. He
is a member of the U.S. District Court,
Northern California. Earlier in his career
previous to his practice of law, Mr. Dai was
Political Accounts
Manager with AT & T providing communication
services to Democratic, Republican and
Independent Conventions and Presidential
Candidates. He was business and systems
consultant to Fortune 500 corporations.
Eventually, he was
instrumental in helping to develop Service
Oriented Policies, Products and Services as
Market Planning Manager with Pac Bell. Also a
systems design engineer, he developed digital
communications technologies in both the public
and private sectors. His principal goal in
electing to practice law is to assert the
rights of all citizens under the United States
Constitution to be able to enjoy their Lives,
attain a level of Freedom and the Liberty to
Pursue their Happiness in whatever they might
choose to do . . . with the full Equal
Protection of the law without discrimination
as to race, creed, religion, sex, economic
status or political persuasion.
DIRECTORS
JOSEPH
ROBERT GIANNINI
has B.B.A.
from Temple University and a J.D. from
Temple University School of Law (1983). He
is a member in good standing of the bar of
the Pennsylvania, New Jersey, and U.S.
Supreme Court, as well as numerous other
federal courts. He has attended Gerry
Spence’s Trial Lawyers College. He is a
member of the American Bar Association’s
Litigation Section and Legal Education and
Admissions. He testified before and
presented written argument to the ABA MJP
Commission hearing in San Diego. See “A
Nationwide Need for the Primacy of the First
Amendment Rights to Advocate, Associate, and
Petition in the New Millennium” at
http://www.abanet.org/cpr/mjp/mjp-giannini_witness.html.
He has written numerous articles published
in legal newspapers calling for full
reciprocal bar admission. He spearheaded
legislation in California that was enacted
into law 99-0 in 2000 calling for full
reciprocal admission for experienced
sister-state attorneys, that was
subsequently, diluted to
provide only second class limited bar
admission privileges for corporate counsel
and attorneys working for qualified pro bono
organizations with the promise the issue would be re-visited in a few years.
JEFFREY
L. RUSSELL is a graduate of the University of Akron School of Law (1974). He has 16 years experience as an Assistant United States Attorney having served as a federal prosecutor in the Northern District of Ohio (Cleveland), Southern District of Florida (Miami), Central District of California (Los Angeles), Northern District of California (San Francisco and San Jose ), and the Department of Justice Headquarters in Washington, D.C. Mr. Russell has conducted 45 criminal trials in seven United States District Courts, and he has successfully argued appeals in the First, Sixth, Ninth, and Eleventh Circuits. He is a member of the bar of the Supreme Court of Ohio, Supreme Court of the United States, and many other federal courts. He testified before and presented written argument to the ABA MJP Commission hearing in San Diego. See
http://www.abanet.org/cpr/mjp/mjp-russell_witness.html
CHRYSTAL C.
GREEN has a Bachelor of Arts (B.A.) from
McGill University,
a Bachelor of Laws (LL.B) from the
University of Ottawa’s French Common Law
Section, and a Masters of Laws (LL.M) in
Comparative Law from Howard Univeristy School
of Law, the thesis of which was a comparative
study of critical race feminist issues within
environmental justice in Canada and the United
States, examining California in particular as
a model. Bilingual in English and French and
practicing in both languages, she is also able
to practice in both Canada and the United
States, as a member of the California State
Bar as well as the Law Society of Upper
Canada.
Mrs. Green's interest in civil rights stems from her international
upbringing. Born in Canada, and having lived
in the Kenya, the United States and South
Africa before returning to Montreal to attend
McGill University, her international childhood
was the catalyst for a lifelong commitment to
civil rights. Mrs. Green currently works as a
Canadian lawyer and an American attorney at an
immigration law firm, continuing her
commitment to civil and human rights.
BRANDON
FELTON is a native of New Orleans.
Mr. Felton graduated from Morehouse
College with honors and earned his law degree
at the Louisiana State University’s Paul M.
Herbert Law Center. He is a member of the
Florida and New York bar.
Mr. Felton began his professional
career as an Assistant State Attorney in
Miami, Florida, where he successfully tried
numerous bench and jury trials. Mr. Felton
then transitioned to private practice,
including insurance defense and labor and
employment actions. Mr. Felton has never
abandoned his dedication to community service,
continuing to work as an advocate for one of
the largest nonprofits in New York City.
Mr.
Felton is married to Yolanda Pittman Felton,
also an attorney.
ROBERT
BLOOM is a graduate of Northwestern and he holds a J.D. form New York University School of Law (1965). He is admitted to practice in New York, the United States Supreme Court, the Ninth Circuit, and the Northern District of California. He has been counsel for defendant in numerous high profile criminal cases including Geronimo Pratt.
KENNETH
OWEN is a graduate with Great Distinction, from Oakland College of Law. He has an L.L.M. with honors from Golden Gate University School of Law. He is a member of bar of the Arizona Supreme Court, Sixth, Ninth, Tenth, Eleventh, and D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals. He has authored, Environmental Justice Enforcement Requires Reassessment Under the Equal Protection Clause, Title VI of the Civil Rights Act, and Environmental Statutes. 30 Golden Gate University Law Review 379. Mr. Owens is an Instructor of Constitutional Law and Environmental Law at Oakland College of Law.
|