Reader Ad Slot
Reader Ad Slot placeholder
If you would like to support SpookStack without paying out of pocket, please consider allowing advertising cookies. It helps cover hosting costs and keeps the archive free to browse. You can change this choice at any time.
Supreme Court — Part 18
Page 107
107 / 129
Ve Columbia Bar ia the only office in Washington, D.C., that has
,
Memorandum _, ~ | Oo
To: DIRECTOR, PRI Dae 5/4/84
(Attention: Civil Rights a
Applicant Section)
From: SAC, WFO
v
Subject : \/unnecessaryBar Checks at the us) supreme Court
and U.S. District Court in Applicant Type Investigations
Washington Field currently conducta a record check
at the U.S. Supreme Court and U.S. District Court in applicant
type investigations in every instance where an applicant indicates
they are an attorney. The purpose of those checks is to deter-
mine whether the applicant is admitted to practice before those
courts. A record check is also conducted at the District of
Columbia Bar (D.C. Unified Bar) to determine membership
and at the Office of Bar Counsel to determine standing and
ee er
grievances,
i
District of Columbia Bar has advised that the District of
licensing authority over attorneys. He further advised that the
Office of Bar Counsel, which is associated with the District
of Columbia Bar, is the office responsible for maintaining
on standing and grievances pertaining to local attorneys.
Geer note: that admission to practice before individual
ourts, cluding the U.S. Supreme Court, within the District
of Columbia is simply a matter of the attorney requesting
to be placed on the court's register and: furnishing a letter
certifying good standing.
After reviewing this procedure it is Washington
Field's conclusion that the record checks at the U.S. Supreme
Court and U.S. District Court are unnecessary and an unwarranted
drain of this field office's limited resources. It is unclear
why or when these checks were instituted at tashington Field or
the rationale behind them. The checks reveal only whether the
applicant has met the pro forma requirements for admission to
practice hefors those courts. Neither court has licensing
authority and a check of their membership records does not
produce information as to any record of complaints or investi-
ations concerning an applicant. bp BoD SS Ce ee momen
aN Vw =. 4 MOP RECORDED
ureau - ce : a orn ri
= four easy 2 ae MAY 23 1884
ars (161-00) ee
o* (116-00) ——e
{77-06} a
(67-00) 25} AO
7 “ lbIC- ral/oo7
(oe 1 hese
Reveal the original PDF page, then click a word to highlight the OCR text.
Community corrections
No user corrections yet.
Comments
No comments on this document yet.
Bottom Reader Ad Slot
Bottom Reader Ad Slot placeholder
If you would like to support SpookStack without paying out of pocket, please consider allowing advertising cookies. It helps cover hosting costs and keeps the archive free to browse. You can change this choice at any time.
Continue Exploring
Agency Collection
Explore This Archive Cluster
Broad Topic Hub
Topic Hub
letter
bureau
Related subtopics
Subtopic
Subtopic
Subtopic
Subtopic
Subtopic
Subtopic