<html>
<body>
<br>
<div align="right"><b>NEWS
RELEASE
<br><br>
</div>
<u>FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE<br><br>
</u>November 3, 2009 <br><br>
<br><br>
<br><br>
<u>CONTACTS:<br><br>
</u></b>Chris Danielsen, Director of Public Relations, NFB, (410)
659-9314, ext. 2330<br><br>
Scott Labarre, Labarre Law Offices, P.C., (303) 504-5979<br><br>
Daniel Goldstein, Brown, Goldstein & Levy, LLP, (410)
962-1030<br><br>
Larry Paradis, Disability Rights Advocates, (510) 665-8644<br><br>
<br><br>
<br><br>
<div align="center"><b>NATIONAL CONFERENCE OF BAR EXAMINERS (NCBE)
DISCRIMINATES AGAINST BLIND AND LOW VISION LAW SCHOOL GRADUATES<br><br>
<br><br>
</b></div>
OAKLAND, Calif. - A suit filed today in Federal court alleges 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)
to a law school graduate who is blind. <br><br>
<br><br>
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, CA. <br><br>
<br><br>
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.
The California Bar examination has two sections; a California section and
the MBE. 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. <br><br>
<br><br>
Even though the California State Bar is a named Defendant in the suit,
they have offered to provide the Plaintiff with all the accommodations
she requested for the California section of the bar examination. However,
the NCBE refuses to allow the California Bar Examiners to give the
Plaintiff certain of the accommodations that she needs on the MBE portion
of the bar exam. The California State Bar is fulfilling its legal
obligation and is only named in the complaint as an indispensable party.
Plaintiff hopes that the lawsuit will convince the NCBE to follow the
California State Bar’s example and provide the requested accommodations
on the MBE portion of the bar exam. <br><br>
<br><br>
The NCBE has also denied Plaintiff the accommodations at issue on the
MPRE exam. This is a separate exam that bar applicants need to pass
to be admitted to practice. The ACT is also named in the complaint
since it administers the MPRE examination for NCBE and is thus also an
indispensable party. <br><br>
<br><br>
The Plaintiff Stephanie Enyart is a law school graduate who is legally
blind and requires accommodations to take 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. Ms. Enyart
has relied on this combination of assistive technology as an
accommodation on her exams throughout law school and in her current legal
work. <br><br>
<br><br>
The NCBE has refused to allow Ms. Enyart these reasonable accommodations
for the MBE and MPRE on several occasions during the past years. In
recent discussions with Plaintiff’s counsel, 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 are preventing Ms. Enyart from obtaining
admission to the bar, impeding her career. <br><br>
<br><br>
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." <br><br>
<br><br>
Janice Ta, President of the National Association of Law Students with
Disabilities (NALSWD), which expressed support for the lawsuit, said “The
legal profession must recognize and be prepared for the spectrum of
conditions and disabilities that law students have. Testing entities need
to be open to a wide range of accommodations. But we find that time and
again they don't seem to understand their obligation for providing
individualized accommodations and adaptive technologies that reflect the
way real law students with disabilities get tested, study, and make their
way around the world.” <br><br>
<br><br>
<br><br>
<br><br>
<div align="center"><b>###<br>
</b></div>
</body>
</html>