I am thinking about taking a DL JD program. I own my own business that does corporate finance, business, and government consulting. I see the degree as a plus in running the business in terms of contracts and corporate law in general. The degree would also help my clients in terms of dealing with simple federal legal issues. I worked for 2 U.S. Congressmen, and I get asked about federal legal issues all the time, so being able to practice federal law would have some value to it. (I don’t give legal advice for the record) The third reason is I just want to say I did it, and at least passed the CA Bar. I’m from the Midwest What is the main difference in taking the University of London LLB program Vs a CA DL JD program? My main goal is to be able to do the federal stuff (work with agencies federal law etc) and help with business stuff such as contracts. What would the LLB let me do that a CA DL JD won’t? I was told by a lady at Concord that if I passed the CA bar I can take the bar in my home state after 5 years, and to “practice” in CA there is no residency requirement so I can do the federal advice here and take the bar in 5 years? AEM [email protected]
A UoL LLB will not allow you to practice law in California under any circumstances. A CA-approved DL JD will allow you to practice law in California. Christian
Watch out for any school representative telling you that you can take the bar in your home state after five years, or whatever. 1) Merely being a lawyer in CA probably won't be enough. You would probably have to demonstrate ACTIVE practice as a lawyer, judge or law school professor. 2) These rules change a lot and there's no predicting what YOUR state will do. There is no trend to increased acceptance of non-ABA accredited degrees, however. There is an active prejudice against correspondence degrees. This is important because the only alternative to an ABA JD in some states is that the applicant show that his education is "substantially similar" to that received in an ABA law school. A Concord degree would likely not survive that test. 3) Being admitted in CA DOES NOT guarentee that you can appear in the federal courts in all states. Here in New Mexico, for example, you must be a member of the New Mexico state bar in order to be admitted to the New Mexico District Court Bar. 4) There are also several states where you would not be eligible to take the Bar EVEN IF you practiced law in CA for five years. These include Texas, Nevada (probably), Montana, and Nebraska, according to my limited research. (So far, I've only looked at Western states.) I am very disturbed by several postings lately where the poster has stated that this or that D/L law school claims that its degree is "acceptable in all states after the holder completes an ABA LLM degree" or that the school has secret arrangments for their students to get into an ABA LLM program or that their graduates can practice in all federal courts after being admitted in California or even that "all but one state accepts their graduates" under some circumstance or another. NONE of these claims is completely true. ALWAYS, ALWAYS check with the Bar of the state where you intend to practice! Nosborne
