Utah Supreme Court

Can Utah courts waive bar admission requirements for non-ABA law school graduates? Labrum v. Utah State Bar Explained

2024 UT 24
No. 20230173
July 18, 2024
Affirmed

Summary

Linzi Labrum graduated from an online, non-ABA accredited law school and sought to waive admission rules requiring ten years of practice for graduates of unapproved law schools. The Utah Supreme Court granted her petition, finding her legal education and experience satisfied the rules’ purposes and her circumstances were extraordinary given changes in online legal education.

Analysis

In a significant decision affecting bar admission standards, the Utah Supreme Court granted a waiver of admission rules for a graduate of an online, non-ABA accredited law school in Labrum v. Utah State Bar, 2024 UT 24.

Background and Facts

Linzi Labrum graduated from Concord Law School at Purdue University Global, an online program that was not ABA-accredited when she attended. Utah’s admission rules require graduates of unapproved law schools to practice law in another jurisdiction for ten years before becoming eligible for the Utah bar exam. Labrum was admitted to practice in California in 2021 but had only three years of legal experience in Utah working as a law clerk, mediator, and pro bono attorney when she petitioned for a waiver.

Key Legal Issues

The court applied the Kelly standard, which requires applicants seeking rule waivers to demonstrate by clear and convincing evidence that: (1) they have satisfied the purpose of the rule for which waiver is sought, and (2) their circumstances are extraordinary and distinguish them from other applicants. Labrum needed waivers of both the unapproved law school requirement and the ten-year practice requirement.

Court’s Analysis and Holding

The majority found that Labrum satisfied both prongs of the Kelly test. Regarding the educational requirement, the court compared Concord’s curriculum and outcomes to ABA standards, concluding that while not equivalent to ABA-accredited schools, Concord provided sufficient education when combined with experience. For the practice requirement, the court credited Labrum’s Utah-specific legal work, including supervised pro bono representation, law clerk duties, and mediation experience, along with strong recommendations from supervising attorneys.

The court found Labrum’s circumstances extraordinary due to: (1) changes in ABA standards now permitting online legal education, (2) her commitment to serving an underserved rural area, (3) her choice to work in Utah rather than California where licensed, and (4) strong endorsements from Utah practitioners.

Practice Implications

This decision reflects evolving attitudes toward online legal education and provides a pathway for qualified graduates of non-ABA schools. However, the dissent’s concerns about maintaining consistent admission standards and the extraordinary circumstances requirement suggest future waivers will remain rare. The court also referred questions about shortening practice requirements to its rules committee, indicating potential future rule changes.

Original Opinion

Link to Original Case

Case Details

Case Name

Labrum v. Utah State Bar

Citation

2024 UT 24

Court

Utah Supreme Court

Case Number

No. 20230173

Date Decided

July 18, 2024

Outcome

Affirmed

Holding

The Utah Supreme Court may waive bar admission rules for graduates of non-ABA accredited law schools when the applicant demonstrates by clear and convincing evidence that the purpose of the rules has been satisfied and their circumstances are extraordinary.

Standard of Review

First instance review – petition for waiver of admission rules comes to the Supreme Court without having been heard by any other court or administrative body

Practice Tip

When seeking rule waivers for bar admission, focus on demonstrating both that the specific purpose of each rule has been satisfied and that your circumstances are truly extraordinary and unlikely to be replicated by others.

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

    • Utah Court of Appeals

    State v. Buranek

    June 20, 2025

    The trial court properly denied defendant’s motion for directed verdict on entrapment grounds where the evidence, viewed in the light most favorable to the State, showed the undercover agent merely afforded an opportunity to commit the offense rather than creating substantial risk that one not otherwise ready would commit it.
    • Constitutional Rights (Criminal)
    • |
    • Evidence and Admissibility
    • |
    • Standard of Review
    • |
    • Sufficiency of Evidence
    Read More
    • Utah Court of Appeals

    Schvaneveldt v. South Davis Metro Fire

    January 6, 2022

    The Utah Court of Appeals lacks jurisdiction to review employment termination decisions by local districts because no statute confers such jurisdiction on appellate courts.
    • Administrative Law
    • |
    • Appellate Procedure
    • |
    • Jurisdiction
    Read More
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.