What does an online law degree do, exactly?
April 24, 2011 1:56 PM Subscribe
What does someone do with a law degree from one of the online unaccredited law schools? Can you pass the bar and practice law? If you represent yourself as a "lawyer" or "counsel" is that illegal?
Short story: At lunch today the topic of online law firms came up. Apparently a friend who was hiring, not for a law firm or for an attorney, had been seeing more people sticking these online law degrees on resumes. Okay fine so far, but they had apparently pitched themselves as being able to work as a corporate counsel types.
There were several real attorneys present and they seemed to think that:
1. You can't pass the bar or practice law if you went to an unaccredited school. Is this true? If this is the case the degree seems very worthless.
2. Calling yourself an attorney or corporate counsel implies that you have, indeed, passed the bar. Apparently there was an issue where summer associates would put "associate" on their resume, before they passed the bar, and that this broke bar guidelines. Would it be illegal if someone who was not a lawyer, represented themselves as "corporate counsel" and if so what would be the repercussions?
3. Do people use this as sort of a stuffer on a resume, or do people who go to online law schools have something specific in mind? I can see if you were running a small business, having any sort of legal training is better than none, but I can't imagine what job, outside of being a practicing attorney, would benefit for this.
I'm not a lawyer, obviously, so please excuse anything that sounds wrong as me miss hearing something. I realize this is a state-by-state thing, but some generalities is what I'm looking for.
Short story: At lunch today the topic of online law firms came up. Apparently a friend who was hiring, not for a law firm or for an attorney, had been seeing more people sticking these online law degrees on resumes. Okay fine so far, but they had apparently pitched themselves as being able to work as a corporate counsel types.
There were several real attorneys present and they seemed to think that:
1. You can't pass the bar or practice law if you went to an unaccredited school. Is this true? If this is the case the degree seems very worthless.
2. Calling yourself an attorney or corporate counsel implies that you have, indeed, passed the bar. Apparently there was an issue where summer associates would put "associate" on their resume, before they passed the bar, and that this broke bar guidelines. Would it be illegal if someone who was not a lawyer, represented themselves as "corporate counsel" and if so what would be the repercussions?
3. Do people use this as sort of a stuffer on a resume, or do people who go to online law schools have something specific in mind? I can see if you were running a small business, having any sort of legal training is better than none, but I can't imagine what job, outside of being a practicing attorney, would benefit for this.
I'm not a lawyer, obviously, so please excuse anything that sounds wrong as me miss hearing something. I realize this is a state-by-state thing, but some generalities is what I'm looking for.
In some states, you don't need to go to law school at all.
posted by empath at 2:06 PM on April 24, 2011
posted by empath at 2:06 PM on April 24, 2011
My understanding of 1) is that very few states will allow you to sit for the bar if you graduate from a non-ABA accredited school. A notable exception is California, where you can sit for the bar, but you must first pass another exam popularly called the "baby bar."
posted by massysett at 2:11 PM on April 24, 2011
posted by massysett at 2:11 PM on April 24, 2011
1. You can't pass the bar or practice law if you went to an unaccredited school. Is this true? If this is the case the degree seems very worthless.
The rules will vary by state. Virginia, example, still allows aspiring attorneys to serve "apprenticeships" under licensed attorneys, then take the bar and become lawyers if they pass. (However, the pass rate for such students is quite low.) California is the only state I'm aware of that allowed attendees of "unaccredited" law schools to take the bar and call themselves attorneys.
2. Calling yourself an attorney or corporate counsel implies that you have, indeed, passed the bar. Apparently there was an issue where summer associates would put "associate" on their resume, before they passed the bar, and that this broke bar guidelines. Would it be illegal if someone who was not a lawyer, represented themselves as "corporate counsel" and if so what would be the repercussions?
Extremely illegal (in most jurisdictions, anyway). In Texas, for example, it is a felony (scroll down to 38.122). In my state (where I am both a licensed notary and a licensed attorney), I am not even allowed to call myself a "notario" in Spanish, because a notario is something between a notary public and a lawyer in much of Latin America and even the use of the term is deemed to be so confusing as to be potentially fraudulent. In many states (including mine), the state bar may also aggressively sue and pursue civil penalties in addition to any criminal penalties. Unauthorized practice of law often falls under the broad category of fraud crimes, which may prevent you from ever practicing law EVEN IF you fulfill the other requirements legitimately later on.
It is not just passing the bar, however. In most states, you must graduate from an accredited law school or otherwise meet the requirements for apprenticeship or education; pass the bar exam; pass the character and fitness examination; AND register with the state bar association, the attorney registration committee, or other similar state body (in most states). EVEN THOUGH I completed the first three of these requirements (always and forever) in my state, if I allow my REGISTRATION as an attorney to lapse, I am not permitted to engage in the practice of law and would be subject to the same penalties as Joe Schmoe off the street who engaged in the unauthorized practice of law. (I may be authorized to practice for a short period in another state while waiting for my authorization in that state to come through, and I may practice under supervision of a licensed attorney even in another state, but I can't even practice law in Indiana without it being the unauthorized practice of law if I'm licensed in Illinois.)
A friend of mine who went to unaccredited online law school specifically had in mind better defending himself against his numerous traffic tickets. This seemed a lot more expensive and complicated than just driving the speed limit, but to each his own.
posted by Eyebrows McGee at 2:16 PM on April 24, 2011 [4 favorites]
The rules will vary by state. Virginia, example, still allows aspiring attorneys to serve "apprenticeships" under licensed attorneys, then take the bar and become lawyers if they pass. (However, the pass rate for such students is quite low.) California is the only state I'm aware of that allowed attendees of "unaccredited" law schools to take the bar and call themselves attorneys.
2. Calling yourself an attorney or corporate counsel implies that you have, indeed, passed the bar. Apparently there was an issue where summer associates would put "associate" on their resume, before they passed the bar, and that this broke bar guidelines. Would it be illegal if someone who was not a lawyer, represented themselves as "corporate counsel" and if so what would be the repercussions?
Extremely illegal (in most jurisdictions, anyway). In Texas, for example, it is a felony (scroll down to 38.122). In my state (where I am both a licensed notary and a licensed attorney), I am not even allowed to call myself a "notario" in Spanish, because a notario is something between a notary public and a lawyer in much of Latin America and even the use of the term is deemed to be so confusing as to be potentially fraudulent. In many states (including mine), the state bar may also aggressively sue and pursue civil penalties in addition to any criminal penalties. Unauthorized practice of law often falls under the broad category of fraud crimes, which may prevent you from ever practicing law EVEN IF you fulfill the other requirements legitimately later on.
It is not just passing the bar, however. In most states, you must graduate from an accredited law school or otherwise meet the requirements for apprenticeship or education; pass the bar exam; pass the character and fitness examination; AND register with the state bar association, the attorney registration committee, or other similar state body (in most states). EVEN THOUGH I completed the first three of these requirements (always and forever) in my state, if I allow my REGISTRATION as an attorney to lapse, I am not permitted to engage in the practice of law and would be subject to the same penalties as Joe Schmoe off the street who engaged in the unauthorized practice of law. (I may be authorized to practice for a short period in another state while waiting for my authorization in that state to come through, and I may practice under supervision of a licensed attorney even in another state, but I can't even practice law in Indiana without it being the unauthorized practice of law if I'm licensed in Illinois.)
A friend of mine who went to unaccredited online law school specifically had in mind better defending himself against his numerous traffic tickets. This seemed a lot more expensive and complicated than just driving the speed limit, but to each his own.
posted by Eyebrows McGee at 2:16 PM on April 24, 2011 [4 favorites]
I'd guess the utility of such degrees lies in tangentially related fields such as lobbying or even elective politics itself, where one could gainfully boast of a having earned a law degree without ever needing that degree to be confer any actual expertise, but rather it's purpose is to impress the rubes, which it indeed may do. Claiming such a degree would be true enough to avoid a lot of gotcha criticism, and in the fields named above actual knowledge of the law may be little more than an impediment to ones imagination anyway.
posted by NortonDC at 2:25 PM on April 24, 2011
posted by NortonDC at 2:25 PM on April 24, 2011
IANAL, but I can at least answer that for 1, it's going to depend a lot on where you are. In California, for example, I'm fairly certain there is no requirement that you have attended law school at all, accredited or otherwise, in order to take the bar exam. California is also somewhat notorious for having one of the most difficult bar exams around, so I'm guessing it's effectively self-regulating in that regard. Even if you passed the bar without going to school, the harder part would be getting a job at any legitimate firm or company, because they'll still be scrutinizing where you went to school.
As for the rest, I know you said you were looking for generalities, but the trouble is that it really does depend a lot on location, and when you say "passing the bar", that only encompasses a small part of the legal hoops involved. There is no single "bar exam" that automagically makes people into fully-fledged lawyers, and even if a person is a fully licensed attorney in one state, that does not necessarily mean they are in any way considered qualified in another.
On preview, exactly what everyone else has already said. I'll show myself out now...
posted by Diagonalize at 2:30 PM on April 24, 2011
As for the rest, I know you said you were looking for generalities, but the trouble is that it really does depend a lot on location, and when you say "passing the bar", that only encompasses a small part of the legal hoops involved. There is no single "bar exam" that automagically makes people into fully-fledged lawyers, and even if a person is a fully licensed attorney in one state, that does not necessarily mean they are in any way considered qualified in another.
On preview, exactly what everyone else has already said. I'll show myself out now...
posted by Diagonalize at 2:30 PM on April 24, 2011
Further FYI -- ANYONE willing to pay for it can take the bar exam ... there are actually people, usually non-lawyers, who make a hobby out of trying to pass it in all 50 states. (Why? NO IDEA. I met a guy who'd passed it in 45 states and was studying for Nevada or somewhere. Just because. It was his thing. And apparently there's a group of people who all enjoy doing this.) Passing the bar exam =/= being a lawyer.
So, yes, just to be clear: Passing the bar exam does not, in and of itself, make one "a lawyer."
(I also left out, I had to be sworn in by the state court and take an oath and so on, in addition to the other requirements I listed above.)
posted by Eyebrows McGee at 2:34 PM on April 24, 2011 [1 favorite]
So, yes, just to be clear: Passing the bar exam does not, in and of itself, make one "a lawyer."
(I also left out, I had to be sworn in by the state court and take an oath and so on, in addition to the other requirements I listed above.)
posted by Eyebrows McGee at 2:34 PM on April 24, 2011 [1 favorite]
It is sometimes possible for a licensed lawyer to waive into the bar of another state. Not sure, but perhaps its possible to skip the ABA accredited school requirement by going the waiver route.
Also, pretty certain one wouldn't need a license to represent oneself. There is a generally recognized right to represent oneself "pro-se," or "in propria persona."
As previous posters have noted, the rules under the federal system (assuming here you are posting in the U.S.), are complex, and are jurisdiction dependent, and so you shouldn't expect a concrete answer here.
posted by L'oeuvre Child at 2:53 PM on April 24, 2011
Also, pretty certain one wouldn't need a license to represent oneself. There is a generally recognized right to represent oneself "pro-se," or "in propria persona."
As previous posters have noted, the rules under the federal system (assuming here you are posting in the U.S.), are complex, and are jurisdiction dependent, and so you shouldn't expect a concrete answer here.
posted by L'oeuvre Child at 2:53 PM on April 24, 2011
Just as a point of reference, I have a friend who is a para-professional in a legal field -- not a lawyer, but her work is very legal in nature. (think compliance issues.) she is completing her law degree from an unaccredited California law school not so she can practice law but so that her employer (which is paying for it) can point to her as having a JD when clients and business partners ask about the program she runs. So there's one example of why someone would do it.
By the way, according to this Wikipedia article, "Alabama, California, Connecticut, Massachusetts, West Virginia and Tennessee allow individuals to take the bar exam upon graduation from law schools approved by state bodies but not accredited by the American Bar Association." it's not clear to me if that includes the multistate portion of the bar or just the state bar (I'd think the latter would only allow one to practice in your state, ever, without the prospect of professionally waiving in later, but don't quote me on that).
posted by devinemissk at 3:07 PM on April 24, 2011
By the way, according to this Wikipedia article, "Alabama, California, Connecticut, Massachusetts, West Virginia and Tennessee allow individuals to take the bar exam upon graduation from law schools approved by state bodies but not accredited by the American Bar Association." it's not clear to me if that includes the multistate portion of the bar or just the state bar (I'd think the latter would only allow one to practice in your state, ever, without the prospect of professionally waiving in later, but don't quote me on that).
posted by devinemissk at 3:07 PM on April 24, 2011
I can see if you were running a small business, having any sort of legal training is better than none, but I can't imagine what job, outside of being a practicing attorney, would benefit for this.
How about being a law professor? One of my law professors (at a very good, accredited law school) had no law degree at all. (And yes, this person teaches a standard, substantive legal course; they were not, for instance, an English teacher brought in to teach a "seminar on law and literature.") I doubt many, if any, people plan to go this exact route, but it is an example of something you could do if you had a law degree from an unaccredited school, or even no law degree.
Also, about 30 states have minor courts where some judges haven't passed the bar or gone to law school. NYT reported on New York's "town" and "village" courts:
How about being a law professor? One of my law professors (at a very good, accredited law school) had no law degree at all. (And yes, this person teaches a standard, substantive legal course; they were not, for instance, an English teacher brought in to teach a "seminar on law and literature.") I doubt many, if any, people plan to go this exact route, but it is an example of something you could do if you had a law degree from an unaccredited school, or even no law degree.
Also, about 30 states have minor courts where some judges haven't passed the bar or gone to law school. NYT reported on New York's "town" and "village" courts:
Nearly three-quarters of the judges are not lawyers, and many — truck drivers, sewer workers or laborers — have scant grasp of the most basic legal principles. Some never got through high school, and at least one went no further than grade school.posted by John Cohen at 3:31 PM on April 24, 2011
But serious things happen in these little rooms all over New York State. ...
New York is one of about 30 states that still rely on these kinds of local judges, descendants of the justices who kept the peace in Colonial days, when lawyers were scarce. Many states, alarmed by mistakes and abuse, have moved in recent decades to rein in their authority or require more training. Some, from Delaware to California, have overhauled the courts, scrapped them entirely or required that local judges be lawyers.
But New York has no such requirement. It demands more schooling for licensed manicurists and hair stylists.
@John, I can't imagine what good a law degree from an unaccredited law school would do for teaching at an accredited one; the ABA is rather jealous of its accrediting authority and since it examines the credentials of the professors as part of its accrediting process, I can't imagine it would look kindly on that.
Every law professor I've known without a law degree has had a Ph.D. from an accredited school, or (in a couple of cases) was a older judge who became a judge before State X required judges to have JDs. (I have no idea if all states now require this or not.)
In states with "minor courts" whose judges don't need JDs, those positions are typically either elected or appointed and, in either case, political connections are what matters. Not sure, again, how an unaccredited JD would be useful ... except possibly in campaign literature? But even so, who you know and/or how you campaign would seem to matter considerably more than what you know.
@divinemissk, my state (Illinois) does not allow lawyers with degrees from unaccredited law schools to transfer their admission to Illinois; to petition for admission by motion, to wit: each applicant by examination (rule 703) or motion (rule 705) shall have "fulfilled the requirements for and received a first degree in law from a law school approved by the American Bar Association." (here) So, yeah, I think you're right; I wouldn't think many states would accept "transfer" lawyers without approved degrees.
posted by Eyebrows McGee at 5:41 PM on April 24, 2011 [1 favorite]
Every law professor I've known without a law degree has had a Ph.D. from an accredited school, or (in a couple of cases) was a older judge who became a judge before State X required judges to have JDs. (I have no idea if all states now require this or not.)
In states with "minor courts" whose judges don't need JDs, those positions are typically either elected or appointed and, in either case, political connections are what matters. Not sure, again, how an unaccredited JD would be useful ... except possibly in campaign literature? But even so, who you know and/or how you campaign would seem to matter considerably more than what you know.
@divinemissk, my state (Illinois) does not allow lawyers with degrees from unaccredited law schools to transfer their admission to Illinois; to petition for admission by motion, to wit: each applicant by examination (rule 703) or motion (rule 705) shall have "fulfilled the requirements for and received a first degree in law from a law school approved by the American Bar Association." (here) So, yeah, I think you're right; I wouldn't think many states would accept "transfer" lawyers without approved degrees.
posted by Eyebrows McGee at 5:41 PM on April 24, 2011 [1 favorite]
In states with "minor courts" whose judges don't need JDs, those positions are typically either elected or appointed and, in either case, political connections are what matters. Not sure, again, how an unaccredited JD would be useful ... except possibly in campaign literature?
Well, you're making it sound like the actual education one receives at an unaccredited law school is completely useless. I have never looked at unaccredited law schools in any detail, but I assume they do teach people something about the law, which would be useful for being a judge.
I agree this is a stretch, and I join the OP in wondering why many people would go to unaccredited law schools. However, the OP is asking what possible use a legal education could have if you can't get licensed. I'm just offering some examples of people who have serious legal jobs where an actual legal education would be useful even though you wouldn't need to have a legal license. Is it convincing that many people would choose this route? I'll leave that up to the OP. But we shouldn't assume that law school can only possibly have the goal of getting licensed; some people might value it for the actual substantive education.
posted by John Cohen at 5:54 PM on April 24, 2011
Well, you're making it sound like the actual education one receives at an unaccredited law school is completely useless. I have never looked at unaccredited law schools in any detail, but I assume they do teach people something about the law, which would be useful for being a judge.
I agree this is a stretch, and I join the OP in wondering why many people would go to unaccredited law schools. However, the OP is asking what possible use a legal education could have if you can't get licensed. I'm just offering some examples of people who have serious legal jobs where an actual legal education would be useful even though you wouldn't need to have a legal license. Is it convincing that many people would choose this route? I'll leave that up to the OP. But we shouldn't assume that law school can only possibly have the goal of getting licensed; some people might value it for the actual substantive education.
posted by John Cohen at 5:54 PM on April 24, 2011
It's correct that non-ABA accredited law schools are a legitimate route to becoming a licensed attorney in California and some other states. Someone close to me went to Concord Law School and is now a practicing attorney with a firm in California. It was clear, when she was there, that a number of Concord students already had careers and could not take time off for law school -- a sizable number were people with hard science degrees who wanted a law degree to become licensed patent attorneys, for which a license from any US state will do.
But for non-legal jobs? I'm skeptical about the value a law degree would bring to any other line of work. Law school really doesn't teach you much law, at all. Without practicing law, you're not bringing much to the table with your freshly minted law degree at your corporate job because you've gotten only the shallowest exposure to law. You haven't worked with the law.
I think the marketing of these online law degrees as being of benefit in other careers is pretty scammy. To practice law with them, fine ... You'll learn how to be a lawyer in your first few years of practice, and the degree lays the foundation. But they're pretty worthless for other work.
posted by jayder at 7:25 PM on April 24, 2011
But for non-legal jobs? I'm skeptical about the value a law degree would bring to any other line of work. Law school really doesn't teach you much law, at all. Without practicing law, you're not bringing much to the table with your freshly minted law degree at your corporate job because you've gotten only the shallowest exposure to law. You haven't worked with the law.
I think the marketing of these online law degrees as being of benefit in other careers is pretty scammy. To practice law with them, fine ... You'll learn how to be a lawyer in your first few years of practice, and the degree lays the foundation. But they're pretty worthless for other work.
posted by jayder at 7:25 PM on April 24, 2011
Not all states require corporate counsel to be licensed.
The theory goes that the Bar is a way for the state to spend the resources necessary to determine the legal and ethical qualities of a candidate, but corporations are capable of that same degree of outlay, and can take those risks upon themselves if they so desire.
Those types of attorneys still cannot file suit, represent the corporation in court, or anything like that, but they are are permitted to give legal advice to the corporation which has hired them.
posted by toomuchpete at 8:21 PM on April 24, 2011
The theory goes that the Bar is a way for the state to spend the resources necessary to determine the legal and ethical qualities of a candidate, but corporations are capable of that same degree of outlay, and can take those risks upon themselves if they so desire.
Those types of attorneys still cannot file suit, represent the corporation in court, or anything like that, but they are are permitted to give legal advice to the corporation which has hired them.
posted by toomuchpete at 8:21 PM on April 24, 2011
Further FYI -- ANYONE willing to pay for it can take the bar exam
I don't think this is right. In NY, for instance, you need to qualify to take the bar exam - see #4 on this page.
posted by Conrad Cornelius o'Donald o'Dell at 9:34 PM on April 24, 2011
I don't think this is right. In NY, for instance, you need to qualify to take the bar exam - see #4 on this page.
posted by Conrad Cornelius o'Donald o'Dell at 9:34 PM on April 24, 2011
I can't pull up the NY rules on my phone but the dude I knew HAD taken the NY bar and passed; he was particularly proud of that one as it's considered a difficult bar exam. I also know Bar-Bri type places have some employees, who are not all JDs, take bar exams over and over to report what's on the tests so they can make their prep materials. So I assume there's some kind of mechanism for people without JDs (or people who've already passed the exam) to waiver for the exam.
But regardless, passing the bar exam is a necessary but not sufficient condition to render one an attorney.
posted by Eyebrows McGee at 3:09 AM on April 25, 2011
But regardless, passing the bar exam is a necessary but not sufficient condition to render one an attorney.
posted by Eyebrows McGee at 3:09 AM on April 25, 2011
A JD without a bar admission absolutely can work on legal matters so long as supervised by an admitted lawyer, and not referring to himself as a lawyer or otherwise implying admission. It's routine for law graduates to do so for months, and sometimes years, after leaving school. The world is full of (sad) paralegals who have JDs but no prospect of passing the Bar. Heck, supervision or pro hac vice co-counsel is (technically) the way that even senior attorneys have to practice in jurisdictions where they are not admitted, although you can call yourself a lawyer with appropriate disclaimers about where admitted.
I would guess that an UPL (unauthorized practice of law) inquiry board would get exercised about a JD being unaccredited only in a circumstance where the graduate was being used in a way that clients and adversaries reasonably would infer that the graduate was admission-pending, when, in fact, his degree disqualified him from admission in the jurisdiction in question.
I agree with you that the resume value of an unaccredited online JD is minimal, although in California if it were get you all the way to taking and passing the Bar (which is indeed possible there), the value would retroactively increase to the clearing price of anyone with a Bar card (which is not zero, although not high).
posted by MattD at 9:05 AM on April 25, 2011 [1 favorite]
I would guess that an UPL (unauthorized practice of law) inquiry board would get exercised about a JD being unaccredited only in a circumstance where the graduate was being used in a way that clients and adversaries reasonably would infer that the graduate was admission-pending, when, in fact, his degree disqualified him from admission in the jurisdiction in question.
I agree with you that the resume value of an unaccredited online JD is minimal, although in California if it were get you all the way to taking and passing the Bar (which is indeed possible there), the value would retroactively increase to the clearing price of anyone with a Bar card (which is not zero, although not high).
posted by MattD at 9:05 AM on April 25, 2011 [1 favorite]
There was an interesting federal magistrate judge ruling, in litigation between Gucci and Guess?, to the effect that since Gucci's in-house counsel did not have an active law license with any state bar, communications between Gucci and its unlicensed counsel were not privileged. The district judge later overturned the ruling, but it led many corporations to scrutinize their in-house counsel's credentials more closely.
posted by jayder at 1:29 PM on April 25, 2011
posted by jayder at 1:29 PM on April 25, 2011
Response by poster: Thanks all! I can't imagine that all the online law degrees go to patent attorneys and people working in really niche industries, I'm guessing that most people just realize they're useless and go about their regular careers.
Also a special thanks for picking up that I meant to say "licensed attorney" and was using "passing the bar" as shorthand for that. When us non-lawyers hear lawyers make a big deal about passing the bar, we forget there's other qualifications involved.
I'm not marking a best answer because in threads where there's so many good replies, it looks weird marking a bunch as best and leaving a few.
posted by geoff. at 2:00 PM on April 26, 2011
Also a special thanks for picking up that I meant to say "licensed attorney" and was using "passing the bar" as shorthand for that. When us non-lawyers hear lawyers make a big deal about passing the bar, we forget there's other qualifications involved.
I'm not marking a best answer because in threads where there's so many good replies, it looks weird marking a bunch as best and leaving a few.
posted by geoff. at 2:00 PM on April 26, 2011
This thread is closed to new comments.
posted by geoff. at 1:58 PM on April 24, 2011