JD, EJD, PhD - Thoughts on My Set of Circumstances

For many people the JD is by definition a practitioner's degree. They've never heard of the non-Bar JD concept, because it does not exist in most US states. The "academic approach to the JD" is not accepted by the American Bar Association, which (for better or worse) defines the JD in most parts of the country.

 

Yes, you are correct. Only California schools offer the EJD or JD with an executive track (exceot for a few foreign schools). Regarding the use of JD, I'll look into it, but I can't imagine the ABA would have any right whatsoever to interfere with the nomenclature. Someone becomes a JD when he completes a course of study. Passing the BAR, or even being eligible to sit for it, is a matter of license. If you view it in a non-law context, you can study education all the way through the doctorate level without ever earning eligibility for licensure. You can do the same thing with psychology. It's a different track. One is academic, the other is practitioner based.

 

That's a fair perspective, and it's precisely why I opened this discussion to the board. I just wonder how many people hold that opinion. I really don't know. I've worked with two people who have earned their JD through traditional, ABA approved schools, but didn't practice law. Way before I knew anything about distance education or ABA approval, I asked them why they didn't practice. Their answer, to paraphrase, "It wasn't for me. I went to school to learn about law, not to practice it." I never even thought to ask additional questions.

I posit that most people don't know anything about ABA approval or state licensure requirements when it comes to law, or any other field for that matter. The vast majority of people I encounter don't even know about the basic elements of accreditation (NA, RA, the government's role in the whole thing, CHEA...)

 

Yes, you're correct. Perhaps that is why Concord went with the EJD rather than the JD. I have no idea. I still posit that the vast majority of people in this country are clueless when it comes to accreditation basics, let alone ABA or licensure requirements. I think the people on this board forget how clueless most of the population is on this subject.

 

The ABA has no right to interfere with the nomenclature. However, your state bar association or state supreme court probably does have that right -- you can be assured that some agency has authority over legal practice and titles in your state. And they will probably tell you that the general public conflates the "JD" title with the right to practice law, just as they conflate the "MD" title with the right to practice medicine. It is technically true that the degree and the license are separate, but it is also true that the public is not necessarily aware of such distinctions.

This issue also arises with new law school graduates who are working for law firms, but have not yet passed the bar; they are JDs but unlicensed. Another example would be a lawyer who was disbarred; he loses his license, but not his JD degree. In such cases, state bars may restrict the use of the "JD" title; it can only be used in conjunction with a disclaimer stating that the "JD" degree holder is not licensed to practice law. That might be the way that a non-Bar JD would be handled.

If you have to put a legal disclaimer on your degree title, that is not necessarily shameful. But it might be something that you get tired of explaining.

 

I hold a non-bar JD from NWCU Law. In my industry, which is not law incidentally, I'm approached with people looking for help in handling their situations. I tell them that I am not a licensed attorney, I do not practice law, however I have a background in law and you can take my opinion for what it's worth because you're not paying for it. After this disclaimer I then tell them what I'd do if I were in the same situation. I don't give them specific legal advice, I only tell them what I'd do for myself. If this is keeping licensed attorneys up at night, thinking that I'm practicing law without a license, the legal profession needs to fry some bigger fish. If I stumble onto something that I feel someone needs specific legal advice from a licensed attorney I am more than happy to tell them to see a licensed attorney. Oh and do I know it all? Hardly. I know my own limitations and I use a team of attorneys to advise me in areas of my business that I don't have the time, inclination or expertise to keep up with.

 

I agree, but I don't think that's the case. However, I will definitely look into it. Even if I elect not to go the law school route, the question of using the JD nomenclature has my curiousity up.

Regarding the use of MD...I agree that the public associates the MD with licensure, but there are plenty of people out there using the MD that have never been licensed. They are medical researchers.

 

Thank you for your input. I was under the impression that NWCU did not offer a non-BAR JD. I looked at that school. It's right in the FAQ. I guess they once offered it but no longer do? Or did you simply elect not to sit for the BAR?

 

PhD or JD....tough decision, right? Check out the following from Harvard! This is for the person who truly can't decide and has nothing but time and money on his hands:

Harvard Law School
JD/PhD Program

OVERVIEW AND PURPOSE

The Coordinated JD/PhD Program is designed for students interested in completing interdisciplinary work at Harvard University and is founded on the belief that students’ legal studies and their arts and sciences graduate studies can be mutually enriched through this pursuit. Students completing the coordinated program receive a JD from Harvard Law School (HLS) and a PhD from the Graduate School of Arts and Sciences (GSAS). It is expected that these students will be strong candidates for teaching posts at law schools and in arts and sciences programs, as well as for other positions in law and academia. Students interested in the coordinated program are encouraged to contact Julie Barton, director of special academic programs at HLS, or Rise Shepsle, assistant dean of student affairs at GSAS, for further information.

 

Think about it like this: as a successful businessman, you must get correspondence from other parties regarding various business issues. Now suppose you receive correspondence signed by someone who has the letters "J.D" after their name. Does that get your attention in a way that "M.B.A." or even "Ph.D." does not ?

If so, is it because the use of this title suggests the potential for litigation ? And if so, is it appropriate for this title to be used by people who are unlicensed and cannot, in fact, practice law ?

Sure, but medical researchers don't deal directly with the general public. Licensing rules commonly exempt professionals who only use titles internally within large organizations.

 

I took the baby bar (first year law student's exam--and there's nothing baby about it, it's essentially a one day bar exam) and I didn't pass it. Came close but no cigar. If I had it to do over again I would not have started my 2nd year of law study, also studied for the FYLSX, and tried to maintain my business on 50 hr. work weeks, all during the same year. When I got the results of the FYLSX I was almost done with my 2nd year of law study. Wanting to finish what I started, I contacted NWCU and asked them what could be done. I talked with Dean Clancey and he made the offer of the non-bar JD. As I'm an older student anyways and have no desire to practice law I took him up on his offer. That's really all there is to it.

 

No, but I admit that may just be me. I work with lawyers everyday. I dont think any of them use the JD. I think they all use Esquire. I get your point though. I really don't think it would ever be an issue unless you attempted to practice law. I don't know. You could be right.

 

Faiir enough. I would have done the same thing.

 

The use of JD common among lawyers but it is an academic degree the term Esq. or Esquire would indicate that they practice law. If the OP did go the JD route it would probably be wise to check with the State Bar but as he said he has two friends who have JD, list them and yet are not attorneys. I would think that the burden not not use it would have to be on the State Bar. It is the same as using Dr. in front of your name, most think medical doctor, but if your PhD was in education it would be up to you to explain that you are not an MD.

 

I graduated from a non-ABA law school program and have never looked back. As long as the JD is earned from a school authorized by the state and is registered with the California Committee of Bar Examiners, your JD is valid. While ABA accreditation is national in scope, so too is DETC accreditation and that would be my choice for a JD degree.

I don't know of any cases on Lexis where a holder of a non-ABA JD from California has been ordered by a state bar to refrain from using the acronym JD behind their name. If, however, one were to use designations like "attorney" or "attorney at law," or "esquire, then in those instances it would be misleading the public, as it infers licensure.

Under the separation of powers doctrine, the judicial branch has the inherent power to regulate the practice of law in a given state - not academic designations. A license to practice law in California will allow a lawyer with experience to come in on motion and sit the bar in a number of other states, as well as practice before Federal trial and appellate courts, in and outside the lawyer's designated state of licensure.

There are thousands of JD graduates from both ABA and non-ABA law schools who have never sat the bar nor had any desire to practice law for a variety of reasons. For one thing, the liability is enormous and also extends to non-lawyers who work under the supervision of an attorney. Then there is the pressure of trial and timelines, where not calendering in a specific procedure could easily give rise to legal malpractice.

In your particular case, I would advise you to study law and pay little heed to the non-ABA designation, as the study of law will forever change your outlook on life.

Lastly, legal knowledge and training in the business sector is highly valued since all law schools teach legal analysis and how to break complex problems down into a concise and cogent format. Really, you can't go wrong.

 

Disclaimer...this is my personal opinion...:sgrin: Some attorneys use JD and some use Esq. The majority of practicing attorneys I deal with use Esq. State Bars can be tough but the two that I have dealt with (GA and MI) aren't really concerned about the nomenclature of a degree.

Their main concern when it comes to the subject is the "unauthorized practice of law". For GA it's almost like a smell test. If someone looks at what you are doing and they (not you) would think that you are in some or fashion attempting to practice law...May God have mercy on your soul. When they have someone in their crosshairs they normally come down hard.

I think Sideman gave the correct answer. That should be the first thing that comes out of your mouth. Honestly, I still give a disclaimer sometimes and I'm a practicing attorney. Normally, only when I'm having a personal conversation and some tries to pull the legal realm into it. It's one of those CYA things.

To my knowledge, every state has a Professional Rules of conduct. That's normally where the State Bar's put information of this nature. I would be really surprised though if your state has issues with you actually listing the degree (once it's obtained) on your company bio. Anything after that though...you might start treading in murky water.

Side note...Caldog is probably right. Most attorneys outside of California have probably never heard of Non-Bar JD. I only found out due to this forum.

 

Pugbelly2,

Have you considered a foreign equivalent to the J.D.? For example, Robert Gordon University (Aberdeen Business School /AMBA accredited) (UK Royal Chartered) offers three online L.L.B. degree options that might be of interest: £4,920 ($7,856) 2-year full-time; accelerated £3,280 per year x 3-years ($5,238); or £2,460 ($3928) per year over 4-years. All online options are less than $16K. Additionally, the RGU L.L.B. is accredited the Law Society of Scotland:

Distance Learning Law LLB | Law Degree Distance Learning
Online LLB course Brochure - View online | Business Management and Accounting | Robert Gordon University (RGU) Aberdeen Scotland

 

Northumbria Law School (Northumbria University) L.L.B. (Hon): 4-6 year distance learning program (no campus attendance required): Total payable 4-years £3,980 ($6,358.00); 6-years £4,800 ($7,665.00)
LLB (Hons) Open Learning - Northumbria University, Newcastle UK
Fees and Funding - Northumbria University, Newcastle UK

 

Possibly not; yet my reply was merely based toward the OP’s J.D. degree inquiry. The professional doctorate J.D. is NOT considered a research-doctorate degree (e.g., equivalent in content and level to the Doctor of Philosophy degree) by the US Department of Education and the National Science Foundation. I would in general consider the LL.B. (postgraduate level) is accepted as J.D. comparable in both rigor and content –or vice versa.