Legal Opinion
Appeal of Murphy
Supreme Court of Pennsylvania
Decided October 5, 1978No. 8, 44PublishedCited by 22 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION OF THE COURT
2Per curiam
For many years this Court, exercising its inherent right to determine the conditions of admission to the bar of this state,1 has insisted on two complementary requirements: one, that an applicant for admission be a graduate both of an accredited college and of an accredited law school; and two, that the applicant take and pass the bar examination administered by the Pennsylvania State Board of Law Ex*45aminers (an arm of this Court). These two requirements have been insisted upon because of the belief that neither alone was sufficient. The learning process of attending a law…
3Cases cited8 opinions
- Rosenthal v. State Bar Examining CommitteeSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1933
- Hackin v. LockwoodCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1966
- Dominic M. Lombardi v. G. Joseph TauroCourt of Appeals for the First Circuit · 1972
- Kadans v. CollinsSupreme Court of the United States · 1972
- Potter v. New Jersey Supreme CourtDistrict Court, D. New Jersey · 1975
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
4Cited by22 opinions
- Massachusetts School Of Law At Andover, Inc. v. American Bar AssociationCourt of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 1997
- Board of Trustees of the Employees' Retirement System v. Mayor of Baltimore CityCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 1989
- Massachusetts School of Law at Andover, Inc. v. American Bar Ass'nCourt of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 1997
- Schumacher v. NixCourt of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 1992
- Lucas v. Maine Commission of PharmacySupreme Judicial Court of Maine · 1984
17 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.