582 F.2d 869 - Pettit v. Ginerich — 582 F.2d 869

How this case has been cited

Cited by 13 later decisions (1 by the Supreme Court) — most recently December 2007

12 federal appellate ·

Later decisions citing this case, by decade. The current decade is in progress, and our corpus holds fewer opinions from the most recent years, so the latest bars are undercounted — not a real decline.

¶1William H. Proctor, York, Pa. (James L. Foster, Baltimore, Md., Harris & Proctor, York, Pa., on brief), for appellants.

¶2Steven P. Resnick, Asst. Atty. Gen., Baltimore, Md. (Francis B. Burch, Atty. Gen., of Maryland, Baltimore, Md., on brief), for appellees.

¶3Before RUSSELL and WIDENER, Circuit Judges, and FIELD, Senior Circuit Judge.

¶4PER CURIAM:

¶5This action, brought on behalf of seven black plaintiffs, and the members of the class whom they seek to represent, alleges that they are being, and have been, deprived of rights, privileges and immunities secured to them by the Constitution and laws of the United States, because they have failed the Bar Examination and been denied admission to practice law. After extensive discovery, the District Court allowed class certification, and upon defendants’ motion granted summary judgment for the defendants, holding that the Maryland State Bar examination did not discriminate against the plaintiffs on the basis of their race and was rationally related to the State’s interest in insuring the competence of the members of its Bar. The plaintiffs have appealed on the ground that summary judgment was improperly granted.

¶6We have considered the record, briefs and oral arguments of counsel in this case, and we affirm on the District Court’s comprehensive findings of fact and conclusions of law, Pettit v. Gingerich, 427 F.Supp. 282 (D.Md. filed February 22, 1977); and on our opinion in Richardson v. McFadden (4th Cir. 1977) 563 F.2d 1130.