Opinion ID: 1948306
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 7

Heading: Rubenstein's Disability Board's Discretion Exercised Fourth Application Granted

Text: Rubenstein failed the Bar Examination in three successive years. An applicant, who has failed to pass the Bar Examination three times, seeking to be afforded a fourth opportunity to take that test, has the burden of providing the Board with evidence: (i) That there existed physical, emotional, or other good reason constituting mitigating circumstances for the applicant's failure to pass 1 or more of the prior examinations; and (ii) That such reason, or reasons, have been resolved and the applicant knows of no impediment to his preparation for the fourth examination. B.R. 52.8(e). The Board was satisfied that the evidence presented by Rubenstein of her previously undiagnosed learning disability constituted a mitigating circumstance for her failure to pass the Bar Examination in the past. Id. This satisfied the Board rule's first requirement [t]hat there existed physical, emotional, or other good reason constituting mitigating circumstances for her failure to pass one or more of the prior examinations. B.R. 52(e)(i). Since Rubenstein's learning disability was of a continuing nature, the Board realized that it was impossible for her to attest to its resolution, which is the second requirement of the Board's rule regarding an application to take the Bar Examination for a fourth time. B.R. 52.8(e)(ii). The Board properly recognized, however, that the continuing nature of Rubenstein's learning disability was not only (1) an improper basis to deny her petition to take the Bar Examination a fourth time but also (2) required it to make reasonable accommodations for her learning disability if she was permitted to take the Bar Examination for the fourth time. The Board decided to give Rubenstein time and one-third to take the essay section of the Bar Examination but no additional time to take the MBE section. Our review of the Board's action must necessarily involve a consideration of both the factual evidence presented to the Board and the applicable law.