Harvard Law grad loses suit claiming lack of bar exam accommodations nixed her BigLaw career

Bar Exam

Harvard Law grad loses go well with declaring deficiency of bar exam lodging nixed her BigLaw job

A federal choose has tossed a lawsuit filed by a New York attorney who promises that she failed the bar examination on her first two tries due to the fact of disability bias by the New York Point out Board of Legislation Examiners.

U.S. District Judge Raymond J. Dearie of the Eastern District of New York ruled July 19 that the board is an arm of the state that is entitled to 11th Modification immunity from the lawyer’s declare underneath Title II of the People in america with Disabilities Act, Regulation360 reports.

The lawsuit was filed in June 2016 by a law firm who graduated from Harvard Regulation Faculty and is now identified in courtroom files as T.W. The accommodate claimed that bar examiners’ failure to accommodate T.W.’s incapacity led to her firing at Ropes & Grey. T.W. handed the bar exam on her third consider in 2015 just after she was given double time to get it.

T.W. had sought the accommodations for anxiety and cognitive deficits prompted by an incident in an all-terrain car.

The ADA challenge was the past remaining declare in T.W.’s lawsuit. The 2nd U.S. Circuit Court docket of Appeals at New York ruled in April 2021 that bar examiners could not be sued under Portion 504 of the Rehabilitation Act, which bans incapacity discrimination by programs or things to do receiving federal monetary assistance. The board does not acquire federal funding, the appeals courtroom reported.

In ruling on T.W.’s ADA assert, Dearie stated Congress attempted to abrogate point out immunity in ADA Title II suits for dollars damages, but it was not constitutionally valid. Congress can get rid of immunity below its authority to enforce the 14th Modification, but in T.W.’s case, there is no alleged 14th Amendment violation, Dearie claimed.

The conclusion is in accord with a amount of district courts that have deemed the situation, Dearie reported.

Dearie also turned down T.W.’s request for injunctive aid that would reduce legislation examiners from reporting documents of her test effects, partly due to the fact expungement would not tackle the alleged hurt.

“T.W. submits that she faces continuing harm because the document of her bar evaluation failures has hindered her position look for and job potential clients,” Dearie wrote. “But T.W. by no means alleges that a prospective employer has inquired about her bar examination report, considerably considerably less designed a employing conclusion based mostly on that record. As an alternative, she alleges that regulation companies have figured out ‘that she did not have the prospect to acquire the practical experience they seek out from a 2013 graduate due to the disruptions triggered by her bar assessment failure.’ … The court docket cannot rewrite history expungement will neither change T.W.’s stage of expertise nor undo the point that she did not effectively go the bar until eventually 2015. Moreover, the injunctive relief T.W. requests would suppress a report that, in accordance to the board, it is prohibited from disclosing to employers.”

The situation is T.W. v. New York Point out Board of Law Examiners.

See also:

ABAJournal.com: “Bar examinees have small accomplishment with accommodation requests and say the system is stressful”