Title: Arthur Robert Petrie v. Board of Bar Examiners
Citation: N/A
Docket Number: 1997AP002414-BA
State: Wisconsin
Issuer: Wisconsin Supreme Court
Date: March 19, 1998

SUPREME COURT OF WISCONSIN 
 
 
Case No.: 
97-2414-BA 
 
 
Complete Title 
of Case: 
 
 
In the Matter of the Bar Admission of: 
 
Arthur Robert Petrie, II, 
 
Petitioner, 
 
v. 
The Board of Bar Examiners, 
 
Respondent.  
 
BAR ADMISSION 
 
 
Opinion Filed: 
March 19, 1998 
Submitted on Briefs: 
March 5, 1998 
Oral Argument: 
 
 
 
Source of APPEAL 
 
COURT: 
 
 
COUNTY: 
 
 
JUDGE: 
 
 
 
JUSTICES: 
 
Concurred: 
 
 
Dissented: 
 
 
Not Participating:  
 
 
ATTORNEYS: 
For Arthur Robert Petrie, II there was a brief by 
Arthur R. Petrie, II, Aliso Viejo, CA and of counsel Charles G. 
Curtis, Jr. And Foley & Lardner, Madison. 
 
 
For the Board of Bar Examiners the cause was 
submitted by Steven E. Tinker, assistant attorney general, with 
whom on the brief was James E. Doyle, attorney general. 
 
No. 97-2414-BA 
 
1 
 
NOTICE 
This opinion is subject to further editing and 
modification.  The final version will appear in 
the bound volume of the official reports. 
 
 
No. 97-2414-BA 
 
STATE OF WISCONSIN               :        
        
 
 
 
 
IN SUPREME COURT 
 
 
In the Matter of the Bar Admission of 
ARTHUR R. PETRIE, II. 
FILED 
 
MAR 19, 1998 
 
Marilyn L. Graves 
Clerk of Supreme Court 
Madison, WI 
 
 
 
Review of 
Board of 
Bar 
Examiners decision;  decision 
affirmed.  
¶1 
PER CURIAM   Arthur R. Petrie sought review, pursuant 
to SCR 40.08, of the decision of the Board of Bar Examiners 
(Board) declining to grant a waiver of the requirement for bar 
admission on examination that the applicant have been awarded a 
first professional degree in law from a law school fully or 
provisionally approved by the American Bar Association (ABA). 
SCR 40.04(1).1 The Board has authority, under SCR 40.10, to waive 
that requirement “in exceptional cases and for good cause if 
                     
1 SCR 40.04 provides, in pertinent part: Legal competence 
requirement: Bar examination.  
(1) An applicant who has been awarded a first professional 
degree in law from a law school that is fully or provisionally 
approved by the American bar association at the time of the 
applicant’s graduation 
shall 
satisfy 
the legal 
competence 
requirement by presenting to the clerk certification of the 
board that the applicant has passed an examination administered 
by the board covering all or part of the subject matter areas of 
law specified in SCR 40.03(2)(a).  
No. 97-2414-BA 
 
2 
failure to waive the requirement would be unjust.” Mr. Petrie, a 
graduate 
of 
Western 
State 
University 
College 
of 
Law 
in 
California, a law school that has not been approved by the ABA, 
contended that his family ties to Wisconsin, his excellent law 
school academic record, and his willingness to write the 
Wisconsin bar examination make his an exceptional case and 
establish good cause for a waiver of the ABA-approved law school 
graduation requirement for bar admission on examination. The 
Board determined that Mr. Petrie’s circumstances did not 
constitute grounds under SCR 40.10 for a waiver.  
¶2 
We hold that the Board did not exercise its discretion 
erroneously in determining that Mr. Petrie did not establish 
entitlement to waiver of the bar examination admission rule 
requiring 
graduation 
from 
an 
ABA-approved 
law 
school. 
Accordingly, we affirm the Board’s decision declining to grant a 
waiver.  
¶3 
In arguing that his circumstances constitute “an 
exceptional case” and establish “good cause” for a waiver, Mr. 
Petrie distinguished his case from that presented in In the 
Matter of the Bar Admission of Sorensen, 180 Wis. 2d 496, 509 
N.W.2d 285 (1994). There, a California attorney applied for bar 
admission in Wisconsin under SCR 40.052 on the basis of his 
                     
2 SCR 40.05 provides, in pertinent part: Legal competence 
requirement: Proof of practice elsewhere.  
(1) An applicant shall satisfy the legal competence 
requirement by presenting to the clerk certification of the 
board that the applicant has provided all of the following:  
No. 97-2414-BA 
 
3 
California practice. That rule provides that an applicant 
seeking to use practice in a jurisdiction having requirements 
for bar admission there on the basis of practice conducted in 
Wisconsin that are different from those set forth in SCR 
40.05(1) must satisfy the requirements of that jurisdiction. 
Thus, because California requires applicants for bar admission 
on the basis of law practice to pass a form of its bar 
examination, Mr. Sorensen was required to pass the Wisconsin 
examination. Believing that SCR 40.04(1) rendered him ineligible 
to write the Wisconsin bar examination, as he had graduated from 
a non-ABA-approved law school, he sought a waiver of the rule, 
SCR 40.05(1)(c), requiring him to pass the Wisconsin bar 
examination. We upheld the Board’s decision declining to grant 
Mr. Sorensen a waiver and noted that Mr. Sorensen could seek a 
waiver of the law school graduation requirement for bar 
                                                                  
(a) Proof of admission to practice law by a court of last 
resort in any other state or territory or the District of 
Columbia.  
(b) Proof that the applicant has been primarily engaged in 
the active practice of law in the courts of the United States or 
another state or territory or the District of Columbia for 3 
years within the last 5 years prior to filing application for 
admission.  
(c) If any state, territory or the District of Columbia 
practice in which is proposed to satisfy the requirement of sub. 
(b) has, as of the date of the filing of the application, 
requirements for bar admission in that jurisdiction on the basis 
of practice in Wisconsin other than those set forth in subs. (a) 
and 
(b), 
proof 
that 
the 
applicant 
has 
satisfied 
those 
requirements of that state, territory or the District of 
Columbia.  
No. 97-2414-BA 
 
4 
examination admission in order to write the Wisconsin bar 
examination, upon successful completion of which he would be 
eligible for admission to the Wisconsin bar. Id., 499.  
¶4 
In this review, Mr. Petrie contended that, unlike Mr. 
Sorensen, he is not seeking bar admission without examination; 
on the contrary, he applied for admission on examination under 
SCR 40.04 and requested a waiver of the law school graduation 
requirement so that he could qualify. A more significant 
distinction, however, is that Mr. Sorensen sought bar admission 
under SCR 40.05 on the basis of his law practice, which is not 
limited to applicants who have graduated from an ABA-approved 
law school. Mr. Sorensen apparently believed, incorrectly, that 
in order to write the Wisconsin bar examination in satisfaction 
of a California-related 
requirement 
incorporated 
into the 
admission on law practice rule, he had to meet or obtain a 
waiver of those requirements applicable to a person seeking 
admission on the basis of examination. To the extent the 
language in Sorensen, supra, suggests that his understanding was 
correct, it is hereby withdrawn.  
¶5 
Our bar admission rules provide three ways for an 
applicant to establish legal competence for bar admission -– 
under the diploma privilege, by bar examination, and by the 
active practice of law in another jurisdiction for a specified 
period. While 
establishing 
legal 
competence 
by 
successful 
completion of the bar examination is limited to applicants 
having a first professional degree in law from an ABA-approved 
law school, satisfying the legal competence requirement by the 
No. 97-2414-BA 
 
5 
practice of law in another jurisdiction is not so limited. It is 
that practice of law by which the applicant ordinarily satisfies 
the legal competence requirement, but if the corresponding bar 
admission rule of the jurisdiction in which that practice 
occurred requires passing that jurisdiction’s bar examination, 
or a form of it, in addition to the practice of law for a 
specified period, the applicant must pass the Wisconsin bar 
examination. In such a case, the applicant’s graduation from an 
ABA-approved law school is not a condition precedent to writing 
the Wisconsin examination or, if successful, to admission to the 
Wisconsin bar under SCR 40.05.  
¶6 
In the instant case, Mr. Petrie contended that absent 
a waiver of the ABA-approved law school graduation requirement, 
he is ineligible to write the Wisconsin bar examination and, as 
a result, will be barred forever from admission to the practice 
of law in this state. That contention ignores the fact that he 
can establish eligibility for admission under SCR 40.05 by 
practicing law in a jurisdiction that does not require law 
practice admission applicants to pass its bar examination. More 
importantly, Mr. Petrie can establish eligibility for bar 
admission on the basis of his California law practice, provided 
he pass the Wisconsin bar examination. His graduation from a 
non-ABA-approved law school is not an impediment to his 
satisfaction of a bar examination requirement incorporated by 
SCR 40.05(1)(c) for admission on law practice; no waiver of the 
ABA-approved law school graduation requirement for admission on 
examination under SCR 40.04 is necessary in order for him to 
No. 97-2414-BA 
 
6 
write the Wisconsin bar examination as part of qualifying for 
admission on practice under SCR 40.05.  
¶7 
IT IS ORDERED that the decision of the Board of Bar 
Examiners is affirmed.  
 
 
 
1