| -
A compilation of court cases regarding character and fitness issues.
Click
here to see. |
|
- Here is proof exclusively obtained by StateBarWatch that the State Bar of Michigan has denied character and fitness clearance to applicants simply because the applicants were not liked by the licensing officials.
Click
here to see the document. | |
Below is some information the Michigan character and fitness staff do not want you to know about...
| Thomas Byerley, (former) Director | Click here to see Character & Fitness Director Byerley's representation to Judge David W. McKeague that there is "no evidence that any applicant to the State Bar of Michigan has been denied admission for exercising her or his First Amendment rights." Judge McKeague dismissed the plaintiff's claims, based on this representation. But see below what StateBarWatch found...
Click here to see Byerley's brief in Dean v. Byerley, stating "The bar has had several applicants who exercised free speech in a fashion that contributed to a recommendation of denial." (See p. 7-9)
Click here to listen to the head of the Michigan Character and Fitness Department argue to a federal appeals panel that there is no citation of any authority that anyone has been denied admission to the Bar for exercising First Amendment rights, while 48 hours later, a different federal appeals panel heard a case where he argued on summary judgment that "The Bar has had several applicants who have exercised free speech in a fashion that contributed to a recommendation of denial of admission." | | |
__________________________________________________________________
| Victoria Kremski, Assistant Director | Click here to see Victoria Kremski tell the Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals that "[B]yerley is not involved in the admission process..." But after StateBarWatch discovered otherwise, it forced Kremski to correct her misstatement. See below...
Click here to see Victoria Kremski's "Correction of a Misstatement in the Record," which was filed in the Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals in response to evidence obtained by StateBarWatch.org (and turned over to Plaintiff E. Stephen Dean).
Click here to see Victoria Kremski's November 11, 2003 letter to the United States Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit, referring to herself as "former counsel" for Defendant Thomas Byerley.
Click here to see Victoria Kremski's December 19, 2003 filing with the Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals, reiterating that "misstatements" were made, on Byerley's behalf, to 3 federal Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals judges.
Click here to see StateBarWatch's February 9, 2005 letter to Victoria Kremski urging her to correcct defamatory and misleading statements on the State Bar's web site. | | |
_______________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________
Judicial Review in Michigan's Process Is Virtually Nonexistent:
All of these cites involve Bar applicants who received one-line denials from the Michigan Supreme Court concerning their applications for admission, following an adverse administrative decision from the Michigan Board of Law Examiners: Bagne v. BLE, 636 N.W.2d 140 (Mich. 2001), Dubuc v. BLE, 627 N.W.2d 603 (Mich. 2001), Porter v. BLE, 460 Mich. 1204 (Mich. 1999), Wells v. BLE, 590 N.W.2d 64 (Mich. 1999), Chapman v. BLE, 584 N.W.2d 735 (Mich. 1998), Mouradian v. BLE, 567 N.W.2d 242 (Mich. 1997), Maxon v. BLE, 557 N.W.2d 315 (Mich. 1996), Chapman v. BLE, 552 N.W.2d 168 (Mich. 1996), Becker v. BLE, 543 N.W.2d 209 (Mich. 1995), Burton v. BLE, 535 N.W.2d 793 (Mich. 1995), Yashinsky v. BLE, 528 N.W.2d 741 (Mich. 1995), Thomas v. BLE, 519 N.W.2d 897 (Mich. 1994), Wiegen v. BLE, 518 N.W.2d 486 (Mich. 1994), Wiegen v. BLE, 512 N.W.2d 318 (Mich. 1993), Hillis v. BLE, 511 N.W.2d 685 (Mich. 1993), Winokur v. BLE, 509 N.W.2d 156 (Mich. 1993), Scarfone v. BLE, 503 N.W.2d 904 (1993), Hillis v. BLE, 498 N.W.2d 736 (Mich. 1993), Mayfield v. BLE, 489 N.W.2d 776 (Mich. 1992), Sheikh v. BLE, 486 N.W.2d 686 (Mich. 1992), Qua v. BLE, SC No. 90203 (1991), Holland v. BLE, SC No. 80597 (1987), Chrzanowski v. BLE, SC No. 79219 (1986), Jaglan v. BLE, SC No. 77692 (1986).
There is a notable exception to the Michigan Supreme Court’s historic one-line denials. Current Michigan Supreme Court Justice Steven Markman’s (then U.S. Attorney for the E.D. Mich.) wife, Mary Kathleen Markman, had an unusual and phenomenal result with her admission problem. See, Markman v. BLE, 464 N.W.2d 493 (Mich. 1991)
|
