Utah Supreme Court
Can Utah waive ABA accreditation requirements for bar admission? In re Anthony Explained
Summary
Thomas Anthony, a 1980 graduate of non-ABA accredited Western State University, was denied permission to sit for the Utah bar exam under rule 14-704(a)(3) requiring graduation from an ABA-accredited law school. Anthony had practiced law in California for nearly thirty years without disciplinary issues before moving to Utah in 2008.
Analysis
Background and Facts
Thomas Anthony graduated from Western State University in 1980, which was accredited by the California State Bar but not the ABA. After practicing law in California for nearly thirty years without disciplinary issues, Anthony moved to Utah in 2008 to care for his ailing mother. When he applied to sit for the Utah bar exam, the Utah State Bar denied his application under rule 14-704(a)(3), which requires graduation from an ABA-accredited law school—a requirement added in 2003 after Anthony’s initial 1988 application attempt.
Key Legal Issues
The court addressed two primary issues: whether Anthony could seek extraordinary relief without exhausting the Bar’s appeals process, and whether waiver of the ABA accreditation requirement was appropriate given his extensive practice experience. The Bar argued Anthony should pursue the normal appeals process under rule 14-709, while Anthony contended this would be futile since the Bar lacked authority to waive admissions requirements.
Court’s Analysis and Holding
The Utah Supreme Court held that extraordinary relief was appropriate because the Bar’s appeals process would be futile—only the court has authority to waive admissions requirements under rule 14-702(f). The court granted Anthony’s waiver petition, finding that where an attorney has “actively practiced law, without blemish, for nearly thirty years and comes highly recommended by judges, clients, and fellow attorneys,” waiver of the ABA accreditation requirement is appropriate. The court emphasized that admission requirements should protect citizens by ensuring competent and ethical representation, and strict rule application may sometimes undermine rather than further these goals.
Practice Implications
This decision establishes that ABA accreditation requirements may be waived in appropriate cases, particularly for experienced attorneys with unblemished practice records. The court referred the issue to the Bar and rules committee to develop standards and procedures for future waiver requests and to grant the Bar authority to make such waivers subject to court review. Practitioners seeking similar relief should demonstrate extensive, successful practice experience and the futility of alternative remedies when requesting extraordinary relief.
Case Details
Case Name
In re Anthony
Citation
2010 UT 3
Court
Utah Supreme Court
Case Number
No. 20090576
Date Decided
February 2, 2010
Outcome
Affirmed
Holding
The Utah Supreme Court may waive the ABA accreditation requirement for bar admission when an attorney has actively practiced law without blemish for nearly thirty years and comes highly recommended.
Standard of Review
Extraordinary relief petition – no appellate standard of review applicable
Practice Tip
When seeking extraordinary relief from admissions requirements, demonstrate that normal appeals processes would be futile due to the reviewing body’s lack of authority to grant the requested relief.
Need Appellate Counsel?
Lotus Appellate Law handles appeals before the Utah Court of Appeals, Utah Supreme Court, California Court of Appeal, and the United States Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit.
Related Court Opinions
About these Decision Summaries
Lotus Appellate Law publishes these summaries to keep practitioners informed — not as legal advice. Each case turns on its own facts. If a decision here is relevant to your matter, we’re happy to discuss it.