Vt. Bar Admission Rule 8

(a) Within the United States. An Applicant who has graduated from a non-Approved Law

School within the United States must satisfy the following requirements no later than the deadline

for applying to take the Uniform Bar Examination in Vermont:

(1) demonstrate that the school attended was in the process of seeking accreditation by

the American Bar Association during the Applicant’s attendance and has not since been denied

accreditation; and

(2) file an official transcript from the non-Approved Law School.

(b) Outside of the United States. An Applicant who has graduated from a foreign, non-Approved Law School (“Foreign Law School”) must establish he or she has:

(1) completed a legal education at a Foreign Law School whose curriculum provided

training in a system based on the common law of England and that is otherwise equivalent to

graduation from an Approved Law School, as determined by the equivalency determination

process; and

(2) been admitted to the bar of a court of general jurisdiction in the country in which the

Applicant attended the Foreign Law School and has maintained good standing in that bar or

resigned from that bar while still in good standing. The Board may waive this requirement for

upon the Applicant’s showing of good cause. For the purposes of this rule, “good cause”

includes, but is not limited to, consideration of the reason(s) the Applicant is not admitted to

the foreign bar, Applicant’s admission and practice in another U.S. or foreign jurisdiction, and

Applicant’s legal employment and/or legal study.

(c) Equivalency Determination Process.

(1) Contents of Equivalency Determination Application. An application for equivalency

determination must include:

(A) the Applicant’s official transcript from the Foreign Law School;

(B) the Foreign Law School’s course catalogue; and

(C) any other information required by the Board.

(2) Deadlines.

(A) To sit for the July Examination, the application for equivalency determination

must be submitted no later than the preceding December 1.

(B) To sit for the February Examination, the application for equivalency

determination must be submitted no later than the preceding August 1.

(C) An application for equivalency determination may also be submitted together

with an application for admission by transferred UBE score.

(3) Written Report. To assist in determining the equivalency of an Applicant’s course of

study to the standards of an Approved Law School, the Board may retain an expert to prepare a

written report (“Report’’), which will assess:

(A) whether the Foreign Law School’s curriculum provides training in a system based

on the common law of England;

(B) whether the Foreign Law School is accredited or in the process of obtaining

accreditation;

(C) whether the Applicant has studied at least half of the subjects of examination

tested on the UBE;

(D) the Applicant’s transcript and the Foreign Law School’s grading system;

(E) whether the Foreign Law School’s graduates are regularly admitted to the

practice of law; and

(F) any other factors that may be relevant to determining whether the Applicant has

completed a legal education that is equivalent to that of an Approved Law School.

(4) Additional Information. Upon completion:

(A) the Report will be provided to the Board and the Applicant; and

(B) the Applicant may provide or the Board may request further information.

(5) Costs. The Applicant is responsible for all costs associated with an equivalency

determination. The Applicant must make a deposit to the Board before the Equivalency

Determination commences.

(6) Result of Equivalency Determination. The Board will determine whether the Applicant

has established that the Foreign Law School is equivalent to an Approved Law School.

(7) Waiver of Report. If the Board, in its discretion, determines it already has sufficient

information to recommend approval of a Foreign Law School, it may waive the Report

requirement.

(8) Extension. If a final determination on an Equivalency Determination Application has

not been made before the administration of the Examination for which the application was

submitted, it will remain pending for the subsequent Examination administration.

Board’s Notes—2022 Amendment

Rule 8(b)(2) is amended to clarify what factors the Board of Bar

Examiners considers when determining whether to waive the

requirement of admission to the foreign jurisdiction.

Board’s Note – 2021 Amendment

Rule 8 is amended to remove the cure provision in 8(c)(4) that

allowed applicants with law degrees from non-common law

countries to establish equivalency by completing a qualifying LLM at

an ABA-approved law school. This change is based on the Board’s

experience that the applications from such applicants consume an

excessive amount of administrative and Board time and the bar

exam passage rate for these applicants is generally low. Notably,

most other states do not have a comparable rule. Former Rule

8(c)(5)-(9) are renumbered 8(c)(4)-(8). Note that this amendment

does not alter the ability of an applicant with a law degree from a

common law country from having the Board consider an LLM from

an ABA-approved law school as part of the equivalency

determination process, pursuant to Rule 8(c)(3)(F).

Board’s Note – 2017 Amendment

Rule 8 is revised to reflect the Board’s practice, based on prior

Rule § 6(h) and current Rule 8(c)(3)(A), of requiring that an

Applicant requesting an equivalency determination for a Foreign

Law School have exposure to the common law. This training is now

an express requirement of Rule 8(b)(1), ensuring Applicants

complete their legal education at a Foreign Law School whose

curriculum is based on the principles of the common law.

Rule 8(c)(4) is added to include a cure provision for Applicants

who do not otherwise meet the requirements of proposed Rule

8(b)(1). The cure provision permits Applicants to correct a

deficiency by completing a Master of Laws degree at an Approved

Law School in the United States, subject to specific requirements

which focus on ensuring that Applicants receive sufficient training in

common law principles, professional responsibility, legal writing,

U.S. law, and UBE topics.

Some of these specific requirements are drawn from the New

York Rules of the Court of Appeals for the Admission of Attorneys

and Counselors at Law, Rule 520.6. The New York Board of Law

Examiners processes a much higher number of equivalency

determinations than Vermont’s Board of Bar Examiners, and its

experience was instructive in the drafting of this revision.

Former Rule 8(c)(4)-(8) have been renumbered as 8(c)(5)-(9).

This rule is drawn from the prior rule § 6(h).

The language regarding schools in the process of seeking

accreditation has been revised slightly for clarity. A new provision

allows the Board to waive, for good cause, the requirement that an

Applicant who is a graduate of a foreign law school be admitted to

practice in that jurisdiction. This new provision is consistent with

the Board’s practice, in exceptional cases, of recommending that

the Court waive that requirement for some Applicants. New

language has also been added to allow an Applicant seeking

admission by transferred UBE score to request an equivalency

determination. The provision for waiver of the usual equivalency

report has been simplified to afford the Board discretion where the

Board has sufficient information to recommend approval of a

Foreign Law School. Finally, the new rule provides for the Board to

make a final decision, rather than a recommendation to the

Supreme Court. The Board’s decision may be appealed to the

Supreme Court as permitted by Rule 25.