[Nfbc-info] Enyart v. National Conference of Bar Examiners

[David Andrews]

It is actually nfbnet.org

Dave


At 04:04 AM 2/1/2010, you wrote:
>The NFB maintains the NFB blind law mailing list 
>which you can subscribe to off the NFB web site 
>or by going to www.nfb.net. This is list is 
>affiliated with the National Association of 
>Blind Lawyers which is open to any legal 
>professionals students or other interested 
>parties. Additionally there is a group for blind 
>law students and potential blind law students at 
>blindlawstudents at googlegroups.com. The ACB also 
>has an affiliate for blind lawyers called the 
>American Association of Visually Impaired 
>Lawyers and I think that they also have a list 
>serve. A posting from one of the lawyers on the 
>NFBlaw list stated that while the ruling in this 
>case only applies to this matter it is unlikely 
>that the Council of Bar Examiners will try to 
>contest this in the future. Feel free to contact 
>me off list if needed and good luck with your law school application process.
>Chuck Krugman, M.S.W., Paralegal
>1237 P Street
>Fresno ca 93721
>559-266-9237
>----- Original Message ----- From: "gary melconian" <garymelc at msn.com>
>To: "'NFB of California List'" <nfbc-info at nfbnet.org>
>Sent: Monday, February 01, 2010 12:46 AM
>Subject: Re: [Nfbc-info] Enyart v. National Conference of Bar Examiners
>
>
>Hello I would like to know what list are available for blind lawyers on
>nfbc. If you can give me those I would truely appreciate it. I will be
>applying for the LSat or to online law schools and so I am wondering if
>these new ruling will also apply to those online law schools as well who are
>registerd with the national council of bar examiners or other bar examining
>organizations. I would truly appreciate some feedback on my questions as
>promptly as possible.
>
>-----Original Message-----
>From: nfbc-info-bounces at nfbnet.org [mailto:nfbc-info-bounces at nfbnet.org] On
>Behalf Of Scott C. LaBarre
>Sent: Wednesday, January 27, 2010 2:32 PM
>To: NFB of California List
>Subject: [Nfbc-info] Enyart v. National Conference of Bar Examiners
>
>Friends:
>
>We, the NFB, are pursuing  an important case against the National Conference
>of Bar Examiners on behalf of a blind, law school graduate.  We are arguing
>the case in front of the Honorable Judge Breyer in the United States
>District Court for the Northern District of California on Friday at 10:00
>a.m.  We would be delighted to have a bunch of blind people and our friends
>in the court room.  Here is the press release we will be using  By the way,
>I would be surprised  if the hearing lasts more than an hour but you never
>know with these things..
>Thanks,
>Scott C. LaBarre, Esq.
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>NEWS RELEASE
>
>
>FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
>
>January 28, 2010
>
>
>
>CONTACTS:
>
>Chris Danielsen, Director of Public Relations, NFB, (410) 659-9314, ext.
>2330
>
>Scott Labarre, Labarre Law Offices, P.C., (303) 504-5979
>
>Daniel Goldstein, Brown, Goldstein & Levy, LLP, (410) 962-1030
>
>Larry Paradis, Disability Rights Advocates, (510) 665-8644
>
>
>
>FEDERAL JUDGE TO HEAR MOTIONS ON WHETHER A BLIND LAW SCHOOL GRADUATE WILL
>RECEIVE REQUESTED ACCOMMODATIONS ON THE FEBRUARY, 2010, CALIFORNIA BAR
>EXAMINATION
>
>
>
>San Francisco, Calif. - On Friday, January 29, 2010, United States District
>Court Judge Charles R. Breyer  will hear motions on whether a blind law
>school graduate will receive the accommodations she needs on the February,
>2010 California Bar Examination. This hearing, scheduled for 10:00 a.m. in
>Courtroom 8, 19th Floor, at the Phillip Burton United States Courthouse, 450
>Golden Gate Avenue, San Francisco, stems from a suit filed on November 3,
>2009 alleging that The National Conference of Bar Examiners (NCBE)
>discriminates against blind and low vision law school graduates. The suit
>charges that the NCBE is violating Title III of the Americans with
>Disabilities Act (ADA) and California's civil rights law by denying
>accommodations on the Multistate Bar Exam (MBE) and the Multistate
>Professional Responsibility Exam (MPRE).
>
>
>
>The Plaintiff is represented with the support of the National Federation of
>the Blind ("NFB") by Labarre Law Offices, P.C., in Denver, CO, and by Brown,
>Goldstein & Levy, LLP, in Baltimore, MD. The Plaintiff is further
>represented by Disability Rights Advocates ("DRA"), a non-profit law center
>that specializes in civil rights cases on behalf of persons with
>disabilities, based in Berkeley, California.
>
>
>
>The NCBE provides standardized examinations for the testing of applicants
>for admission to the practice of law. Two of the tests it controls, the
>Multistate Bar Exam (MBE) and the Multistate Professional Responsibility
>Examination (MPRE) are required for admission to the bar by most states
>including California. The California Bar examination has two sections; a
>California section and the MBE, a national multiple-choice section.
>Although both parts of the exam are administered by the California State
>Bar, the NCBE controls the type of accommodations each state can offer test
>takers with disabilities for the MBE portion of the bar exam.
>
>The NCBE has also denied Plaintiff certain of the requested accommodations
>on the MPRE exam. This is a separate multiple choice exam that bar
>applicants must pass to be admitted to practice.
>
>
>
>Stephanie Enyart is a law school graduate of the University of California
>
>At Los Angeles School of Law who is legally blind and requires
>accommodations to take the California Bar exam, including the MBE, and MPRE.
>She has requested to take the exams on a laptop computer equipped with
>screen reading (JAWS) and screen magnification (ZoomText) software, programs
>she relies upon for reading. Ms. Enyart has relied on this combination of
>assistive technology as an accommodation on her exams throughout law school
>and in her current work as a law school graduate at DRA, on issues
>concerning people with disabilities who are homeless.
>
>
>
>The NCBE has refused to allow Ms. Enyart the reasonable accommodations at
>issue for the MBE and MPRE on several occasions during the past years.  In
>response to the lawsuit, the NCBE has indicated that it will continue to
>deny Ms. Enyart her requested accommodations.  Instead, the NCBE has offered
>alternative accommodations that are not suited to Ms. Enyart's disability
>and are not effective. The NCBE's denials of accommodations prevent Ms.
>Enyart from obtaining admission to the bar, impeding her career.
>
>
>
>Dr. Marc Maurer, President of the National Federation of the Blind (NFB),
>supporting the lawsuit, said "Too often law students who are blind or have
>low vision have to prolong their prospects for licensing while they fight to
>get the same accommodations they've had throughout their educational
>history. Those that opt to settle for inadequate accommodations usually
>struggle to pass or sometimes do not pass at all. Those who control
>admission to the practice of law must obey the law."
>
>
>
>The Plaintiff, Stephanie Enyart, said "As a person who was born sighted and
>became visually impaired later in my teens and twenties, I have learned to
>rely on a combination of assistive technology for accommodation. This
>assistive technology is not cutting edge; it has been around for more than a
>decade. The NCBE offered to provide different forms of accommodation that
>are simply not effective for my disability. They want me to use an
>accommodation that I have never used and as a result, are setting me up for
>failure. The NCBE should recognize that there is diversity within disability
>and stop applying a one-size-fits-all model for accommodations. In this
>technological age, people who are blind and visually impaired have the
>opportunity to utilize various types of assistive technology to be
>competitive students in law school and to lead independent lives."
>
>
>
>Scott LaBarre, one of Ms. Enyart's attorneys who is himself blind,
>commented:  "The law requires that NCBE provide the accommodation that best
>insures Ms. Enyart's ability to take the exam and the evidence gathered thus
>far in the case suggests that NCBE has not met this legal requirement.  We
>look forward to a swift and positive ruling from Judge Breyer in this
>crucial case affecting the rights of the blind and disabled."
>
>
>
>###
>
>LaBarre Law Offices P.C.
>1660 South Albion Street, Ste. 918
>Denver, Colorado 80222
>303 504-5979 (voice)
>303 757-3640 (fax)
>slabarre at labarrelaw.com (e-mail)
>www.labarrelaw.com (website)
>
>CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE: This message may contain confidential and privileged
>information. If you are not the designated recipient, you may not read,
>copy, distribute or retain this message. If you received this message in
>error, please notify the sender at 303) 504-5979 or slabarre at labarrelaw.com,
>and destroy and delete it from your system. This message and any attachments
>are covered by the Electronic
>Communications Privacy Act, 18 U.S.C. §§ 2510-2521.