Lawyer’s Bias Claims Against Texas Law Examiners Board Survive

A Black female out-of-state lawyer who alleges that the Texas Board of Law Examiners denied her request for admission to the state bar without a bar exam, due to racial and sex discrimination, will get to amend her equal protection pleading, a Texas appeals court ruled Wednesday.

But the Texas Court of Appeals, Third District dismissed her substantive and procedural due course of law claims under the Texas Constitution.

Deborah Sonnenschein didn’t meet the requirements for admission because she didn’t obtain her degree from an approved law school, according to the board. Sonnenschein obtained a J.D. from Northwestern California University School of Law in 2012, the court said. The school was registered by the State Bar of California, although not accredited by the state.

Sonnenschein argues she was treated differently than other similar applicants, specifically citing the case of a White male lawyer whom she says was granted “essentially the same waiver” in 2017, the court said.

That applicant had also graduated from a similar California-registered but unaccredited law school, Sonnenschein argued. She alleges that her application was denied because of her race, sex, and interracial marriage to a White man.

The board argued that Sonnenschein failed to allege sufficient facts to demonstrate the trial court’s jurisdiction over her claim that they violated her equal protection rights. It also said the provision that governs bar exam waivers precluded an equal protection claim because the waiver denial here was a result of not meeting a requirement.

However, Sonnenschein is alleging the board failed to uniformly apply this provision as compared to others, and the provision doesn’t preclude such a claim, the appeals court said.

Still, Sonnenschein only alleged she was a member of a protected class without alleging any other facts to support her claim. Therefore, she hasn’t alleged sufficient facts to demonstrate the trial court has jurisdiction, the court of appeals said.

The court classified this as an issue of “pleading sufficiency,” and remanded this claim to the lower court to amend the pleadings with facts that support the disparate treatment claim sufficiently to invoke jurisdiction.

Sonnenschein’s substantive and procedural due course of law claims under the Texas Constitution were dismissed because she has no legal right to be admitted to the Texas Bar, except in conformity to the current admittance rules, the court said.

Justice Thomas J. Baker delivered the opinion. Justices Melissa Goodwin and Gisela D. Triana joined.

The Texas board was represented by the Office of the Attorney General. Sonnenschein represented herself.

The case is Rivera v. Sonnenschein, Tex. App., 3d Dist., No. 03-21-00516-CV, 6/1/22.