JUST IN:
Fifth Circuit case involved an appeal filed by nonimmigrant
aliens whose status rendered them ineligible to sit for the
Louisiana Bar. In 2002, the Louisiana Supreme Court held that Lousiana Supreme Court Rule XVII Section 3(B) defined "resident alien" applied only to those aliens who had attained permanent resident status in the US."
The 81-page case is noteworthy because rarely does a case involve nonimmigrant alien attorneys as plaintiffs filing suit.
For the case, LeClerc, et. al v. Webb, No. 03-30752 (5th Cir. Jul. 29, 2005), see here. http://www.ilw.com/immigdaily/cases/2005,1005-leclerc.pdf
Nonimmigrants Ineligible To Sit For Louisiana Bar Exam
Inactive User
Posted Oct 04, 2005 22:55
JUST IN:
Fifth Circuit case involved an appeal filed by nonimmigrant
aliens whose status rendered them ineligible to sit for the
Louisiana Bar. In 2002, the Louisiana Supreme Court held that Lousiana Supreme Court Rule XVII Section 3(B) defined "resident alien" applied only to those aliens who had attained permanent resident status in the US."
The 81-page case is noteworthy because rarely does a case involve nonimmigrant alien attorneys as plaintiffs filing suit.
For the case, LeClerc, et. al v. Webb, No. 03-30752 (5th Cir. Jul. 29, 2005), see here. http://www.ilw.com/immigdaily/cases/2005,1005-leclerc.pdf
Fifth Circuit case involved an appeal filed by nonimmigrant
aliens whose status rendered them ineligible to sit for the
Louisiana Bar. In 2002, the Louisiana Supreme Court held that Lousiana Supreme Court Rule XVII Section 3(B) defined "resident alien" applied only to those aliens who had attained permanent resident status in the US."
The 81-page case is noteworthy because rarely does a case involve nonimmigrant alien attorneys as plaintiffs filing suit.
For the case, LeClerc, et. al v. Webb, No. 03-30752 (5th Cir. Jul. 29, 2005), see here. http://www.ilw.com/immigdaily/cases/2005,1005-leclerc.pdf
Inactive User
Posted Oct 06, 2005 17:19
Thanks for the info! However, it's a li'l curious that this case came up in the first place. That particular provision is rather unequivocal and easily interpreted. I wonder if they had an angle to their argument though...
Whatever...it's probably Louisiana's loss...psshaaaaw!
Thanks for the info! However, it's a li'l curious that this case came up in the first place. That particular provision is rather unequivocal and easily interpreted. I wonder if they had an angle to their argument though...
Whatever...it's probably Louisiana's loss...psshaaaaw!
Whatever...it's probably Louisiana's loss...psshaaaaw!
Hot Discussions
-
Oxford 2024-2025 BCL/MSCs/MJUR/MPHIL/MLF
Apr 23, 2024 113,256 634 -
Cambridge LL.M. Applicants 2024-2025
23 hours ago 133,190 535 -
Georgetown LLM 2024/2025 applicants
Apr 29 05:51 AM 34,921 193 -
Stanford 2024-2025
Apr 17, 2024 33,428 115 -
Penn Carey Law LLM 2024/2025 applicants
Apr 15, 2024 16,380 111 -
UCLA LLM 2024-2025
Apr 22, 2024 12,559 88 -
Geneva Academy 2024-2025 Applications
5 hours ago 6,367 65 -
UCL LLM 2024-2025
6 hours ago 6,075 59