Washington State Bar Requirements

I read the following at http://www.wsba.org/lawyers/licensing/admissions.htm#1. This appears to be the requirements to becoming a lawyer in Washington State. Does this mean that becoming either a California lawyer or finding a way to clerk could allow one to avoid the ABA law school requirement? Since I'm not an attorney and so many of you are, and have done substantial research in this area, I'd be curious to know your thoughts.

 

There are occasional posters on this forum who are admitted to practice in Washington State and therefore in a better position than I am to answer your question. However:

A law degree is NOT NECESSARY to become an attorney in Washington State. It is possible for a person holding an accredited bachelor's degree to clerk for and study with a Washington lawyer for four years and then take the Washington State Bar exam.

(Whether such a clerk is likely to pass is another question. The Washington Bar exam is notorious for being all essay, including professional responsibility.)

The clerk program is heavily regulated and the clerk's progress is carefully monitored by the Bar Association.

Details, including an easy-to-read brochure are available at www.wsba.org

Washington State, in common with many other jurisdictions, will allow experienced lawyers from other states or even some foreign countries to take the Washington Bar exam regardless of their legal education. There is also a proposal pending to allow foreign lawyers and law graduates and inexperienced lawyers to take the Bar if they also hold a Master of Laws degree from an ABA accredited law school.

 

Hey Nosborne, you seen the huge jump that your alma made in the USN Law School rankings?

All the way up to #69! Pretty soon, that "little school", as I think I've read you referring to it, is going to be top tier!

 

Well, when it does, I'll make the rounds of the big Wall Street firms...

 

First a move into the second tier last year, then a 30 spot! jump this year. Next year...

Better dust off those expensive Italian suits; get ready Wall Street.

 

What Nosborne said. With the codicil that in recent years, very few people going through the Law Clerk program have attained the Bar in Washington. This is probably not so much a reflection of the training or Bar exam as it is indicative of the drop off in the numbers of people beginning, much less finishing, the Law Clerk program.

In addition, it is pretty difficult to find local counsel who would be willing to fulfill the tutor and examination requirements. I think the last person I heard of successfully completing this worked for a public defenders agency and he is now doing criminal defense for them. Please note that this program does not confer a JD or any other academic degree. I think that would make it extremely difficult to find work in the private sector.

There is occasional talk of abolishing this as a quaint relic of Washington being a thinly-populated rural state. A few other states have similar programs, but I wouldn't be surprised to see them gone some day.

 

But if someone wanted to become a prosecutor and was able to do the clerk program for a prosecutors office and perhaps do one of the better know online law programs, they could eventually take and pass the bar and practice in Washington as a prosecuting attorney?

 

I doubt very, very, very much that any county in the state would ever hire a beginning prosecuting attorney who had been trained in that fashion. Noting that you are in the Tacoma area, You might want to call Rebecca Stover at the personnel office at the Pierce County Prosecuting Attorney's office to ask her.

Bear in mind that there are lots of applicants every year from local and national law schools for most prosecuting attorney jobs. The prospect of someone who was essentially home-schooled and does not have a JD are not good.

But again, if you have your heart set on this approach, you are well advised to do some research on the job prospects first. Right now in Western Washington, depending on what area of the law you are talking about, there are many unemployed lawyers out there.

 

And, for what it's worth, Washington is one of only two states (New Mexico being the other... since 2002) that will soon require its lawyers to grasp the basics of Native American tribal sovereignty and, as such, starting in 2007, will add at least one question about Indian law to its bar exam. So, bone-up, Kemosabe!

Don't hold your breath for California to dump its apprenticeship program... at least not as long as Cesar Chavez is still revered in this state; and/or if the United Farm Workers Union (UFW) has anything to say about it. See this article for more information; and this one for at least one real-life UFW-related law apprenticeship success story (Mary L. Mecartney). Moreover, there are many lawyers, law school teachers, and others (me among them) out there who believe that the practice of law should not be such a closed fraternity; that it -- and the law, itself -- should be accessible to mere mortals, as our founding fathers clearly intended it; and that there should be ways of earning the privilege of practice by means more in keeping with those described by Abraham Lincoln in his November 5, 1855 letter to Isham Reavis, in which he wrote the now-famous mantra of non-ABA-accredited law school graduates and those who sat for the bar exam after an apprenticeship:

• My dear Sir:
  
  I have just reached home, and found your letter of the 23rd. ult. I am from home too much of my time, for a young man to read law with me advantageously. If you are resolutely determined to make a lawyer of yourself, the thing is more than half done already. It is but a small matter whether you read with any body or not. I did not read with any one. Get the books, and read and study them till, you understand them in their principal features; and that is the main thing. It is of no consequence to be in a large town while you are reading. I read at New-Salem, which never had three hundred people living in it. The books, and your capacity for understanding them, are just the same in all places. Mr. Dummer is a very clever man and an excellent lawyer (much better than I, in law-learning); and I have no doubt he will cheerfully tell you what books to read, and also loan you the books.
  
  Always bear in mind that your own resolution to succeed, is more important than any other one thing.
  
  Very truly, your friend,
  
  A. Lincoln

In keeping with that viewpoint, and contrary to the notion that apprenticeship may soon be a thing of the past, many are still exploring new and more creative ways to earn a law degree in this country. It will take that -- and more -- I think, for there to ever be a prayer of distance learning law programs being acceptable to the ABA... which I, at least, believe is an essential thing.

Agreed. You must remember, spmoran, that prosecutor's offices are one of the first places that a great many fresh-out-of-law-school and recently-passed-the-bar young lawyers go to get essential trial experience, notwithstanding the comparatively low pay. It's difficult to imagine a better place to get one's feet wet -- fast and furious -- as a litigator than a prosecutor's office. So the list of applicants is often long, and the quality of them often high. For those who have their heart set on getting into a prosecutor's office, but who are too far down the list, an easier (but often only slightly easier) place to get work for a new lawyer is the public defender's office -- which typically (but not always) pays much worse than the prosecutor's office does. Regardless, the applicants to either office tend to be highly qualified, so an attorney trying to get there via apprenticeship would be at a decided disadvantage.

Take that with a grain of salt, spmoran. Lots of lawyers who lament that their profession is saturated will counsel others who wish to enter it away from the profession. That may be good advice if the profession is the somewhat more saturated IT industry, for example... just to name one; but not necessarily such good advice if it's the profession of law about which one is talking. There remain -- and, likely will always remain -- many ways for talented and dedicated men and women to distinguish themselves among lawyers. Just make sure your eyes are wide open before you dare to begin it.

 

It seems to me that there might be another consideration, too.

The law clerk program is designed to educate the clerk in all of the Bar subjects over a four year period. If a clerk is working for a prosecutor's office, it seems to me that a lot, maybe too much, of that education would end up being self-education and strictly theoretical. Prosecutors are pretty specialized. The clerk would not see the actual practice of, say, real property or civil litigation. Worse, there's nothing in the requirements for a tutor to assure that the tutor has reasonably current skill in all Bar subjects.

Keep in mind that there are no limited law licenses; one could do a clerkship at a prosecutor's office but the license is good for ALL areas of law.

If I were to attempt to do it this way (meaning do it the HARD way), I think I'd try to do it in a small to medium sized general practice firm in, say, Yakima or Pasco or even Omak or Walla Walla, somewhere where no firm can afford to become too specialized and with enough lawyers doing different kinds of law to assure reasonable coverage of the material.

All that said, it IS an intriguing idea, isn't it?

California has a few clerks sit every year or so...the first time pass rate is essentially zero. I don't know about repeat takers.