Could BARBRI or the DOJ Pass the Character and Fitness Requirements for Bar Admission?

Here in the Enchanted Mitten, new lawyers applying for admission to the Bar must demonstrate their character and fitness to practice law.  Many of them have taken the BARBRI prep course for the bar examination, and, presumably, some would like to work for the U.S. Department of Justice.

But, could BARBRI and the DOJ themselves pass the character and fitness requirement?  A couple of recent stories suggest they might have some difficulty.

BARBRI and a few law schools are being sued by another bar exam prep company, LLM Bar Exam LLC,  LLM alleges that by donations and gifts to the law schools and lucrative teaching contracts to the schools' faculty members, BARBRI is attempting to monopolize the bar prep market, with LLM being excluded from law school marketing and facilities.

Even worse than BARBRI's alleged conduct, lawyers from the U.S. Department of Justice were recently found to have misled a federal judge and then to have attempted to cover up their misrepresentations. The judge ordered lawyers representing the DOJ in 26 states to undergo annual ethics training, stating:

In fact, it is hard to imagine a more serious, more calculated plan of unethical conduct. There were over 100,000 instances of conduct contrary to counsel’s representations.

 There is a solution, of course, to all this widespread dishonesty.  Move to Wisconsin, where you can lie to your heart's content and still be admitted to the Bar.

Yeah! And Where Are My Lottery Winnings?

Just when you thought every ridiculous lawsuit had already been filed, along comes Luther D. McCaskill with his attorney, Tracie Gittleman.

Apparently, McCaskill came unglued when he learned that his children had not been selected in the lottery used to select the incoming 2009-10 kindergarten class at Highmeadow Common Campus Elementary School in the Farmington Public Schools. His claim, according to the Detroit News, is that the ballots were never shaken (or stirred, presumably), and that all selections were made "off the top" without reaching into the middle or the bottom.

McCaskill and Gittleman want the Oakland County Circuit Court to issue an injunction voiding the previous lottery and requiring the school district to have a do-over.

Let's all applaud this noble effort and ponder the lessons Mr. McCaskill and his lawyer are teaching the McCaskill children:

1. Never accept any decision you don't like.

2. If you lose at a random drawing or a competition, it's not chance -- the fix was in!

3. If you experience adversity, don't try to make the best of things.

4. Always make sure your first resort is a lawsuit! (Okay, as a lawyer, I actually sort of agree with this one).

I once represented a couple that tried to raffle their house. The tickets clearly said, "X tickets must be sold or there will be no raffle" or words to that effect. Well, X tickets were not sold, so they refunded everyone's money. One ticket buyer didn't want his money back, however; he wanted the house. So he sued, asking the court to require the couple to have the raffle, even if his was the only ticket in it.

The court rightly threw that guy out on his ear, which is exactly what should happen with McCaskill. As for Ms. Gittleman, she should spend some time learning why attorneys are referred to as "counselors."

And oh yeah, I want the last lottery drawing done over!