You are viewing a free summary from Descrybe.ai. For citation checking, legal issue analysis, and other advanced tools, explore our Legal Research Toolkit — not free, but close.

Alston v. Nat'l Conference of Bar Exam'rs

Citation: 314 F. Supp. 3d 620Docket: Civil Action No. 17–4506

Court: District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania; June 7, 2018; Federal District Court

Narrative Opinion Summary

In this case, a recent law school graduate, representing himself, filed a civil rights lawsuit against the National Conference of Bar Examiners (NCBE) and state bar exam boards, challenging the grading methodology of bar exams based on constitutional grounds and state law claims. The plaintiff alleges violations of the Fifth and Fourteenth Amendments, asserting that the grading process was arbitrary and violated due process rights, while also claiming negligence and defamation. The court examines jurisdictional issues, finding specific jurisdiction over NCBE based on its contractual activities in Pennsylvania. However, the court dismisses federal claims, ruling that NCBE is not a state actor under 42 U.S.C. 1983. Additionally, claims against state entities were barred by sovereign immunity. The court further rejects due process and equal protection claims, noting the grading process's rationality and lack of discriminatory intent. The takings claim under the Fifth Amendment was also dismissed, as the plaintiff was not deprived of property. Ultimately, the court grants the motions to dismiss with prejudice, concluding that further amendments would be futile.

Legal Issues Addressed

Equal Protection Clause Analysis

Application: Alston's equal protection claim fails due to the lack of evidence showing discriminatory intent based on protected characteristics.

Reasoning: The Equal Protection Clause prohibits discrimination based on protected characteristics like race or national origin, and discriminatory intent requires evidence.

Immunity of State Entities

Application: Claims against state bar boards and their chairs are dismissed because of sovereign immunity under the Eleventh Amendment.

Reasoning: The Eleventh Amendment provides states immunity from lawsuits by their own citizens or citizens of other states unless the state consents.

Jurisdictional Requirements for Non-State Actors

Application: NCBE's activities related to grading exams establish specific jurisdiction in Pennsylvania despite its lack of physical presence.

Reasoning: Jurisdiction is not negated by NCBE's lack of physical presence in the state, as communication and contractual obligations establish sufficient minimum contacts.

Procedural and Substantive Due Process

Application: Alston's claims of due process violations are rejected as the bar exam grading process is uniformly applied and rationally related to legitimate objectives.

Reasoning: His assertion of a procedural due process violation fails because the state's examination process provides specific standards that are uniformly applied.

State Actor Requirement under 42 U.S.C. 1983

Application: NCBE, being a private non-profit corporation, is not considered a state actor, which nullifies Alston's due process and equal protection claims.

Reasoning: NCBE, a private non-profit corporation, does not engage in governmental action despite assisting courts with lawyer qualifications, as established in Borrell v. Bloomsburg Univ.

Takings Clause of the Fifth Amendment

Application: Alston's Fifth Amendment claim is dismissed as he retains his law degree and the ability to retake the bar exam, negating any deprivation of property.

Reasoning: His claim regarding the 'takings' clause under the Fifth Amendment is unsubstantiated as he has not been deprived of property—he retains his law degree.