What is the status under the State Bar Act of a non-resident attorney whose name was on the Supreme Court roll when the Act took effect?

Plain-English summary

The State Bar received many inquiries from persons who were non-residents of Oklahoma when the State Bar Act took effect on June 22, 1929, whose names appeared on the Supreme Court roll as members of the Oklahoma bar, about their status, obligations, and responsibilities under the Act.

The Board concluded, citing Section 3 of the Act ("the members of the State Bar shall be all persons now entitled to practice law in this State"), that the appearance of a person's name on the Supreme Court roll on June 22, 1929, was prima facie evidence that the person was entitled to practice law on that date, and remained so until suspended or until the enrollment was revoked. It followed that each such person became a member of the State Bar on that date and was obligated to pay the fees required by the Act, in lieu of which the person must be suspended from membership.

The Board added that it had the discretion to permit non-resident persons who were on the roll on June 22, 1929, had continued to be non-residents, and had not complied with the Act, to petition the Supreme Court, through the Board of Governors, to strike their names from the roll, after which they would not be subject to the Act.

Currency note

This opinion was issued in 1932, decades before Oklahoma replaced its original Rules of Professional Conduct (patterned on the ABA Canons of Professional Ethics) with the Oklahoma Rules of Professional Conduct (adopted 1988) and the later Ethics 2000 revisions. It construed the State Bar Act and membership roll as they stood in the early 1930s and does not reflect current Oklahoma law on bar membership or non-resident attorneys. Treat this page as historical context, not current guidance. Verify against current rules before relying on any specific rule, deadline, or requirement mentioned here.

Common questions

Q: Did a non-resident on the Supreme Court roll automatically become a State Bar member?

A: The opinion concluded that a person whose name was on the roll on June 22, 1929, became a member of the State Bar on that date and was obligated to pay the required fees.

Q: Could such a non-resident get out from under the Act?

A: The opinion concluded the Board had discretion to let non-resident members who had not complied petition the Supreme Court to strike their names from the roll, after which they would not be subject to the Act.

Background and rules framework

The opinion construed Section 3 of the Oklahoma State Bar Act, defining members as all persons then entitled to practice law in the state, together with the Act's fee and suspension provisions. The questions it resolved concern bar membership and the treatment of non-resident attorneys, matters now governed by current Oklahoma bar-membership rules; the opinion predates the Model Rules.

Citations and references

Statutes:

• Oklahoma State Bar Act § 3 (members of the State Bar are all persons then entitled to practice law in the state)

See also

• Okla. Bar Ethics Op. 18: Territorial-Era Attorneys' Status
• Okla. Bar Ethics Op. 11: Defining Practice of Law

Source

• Landing page: https://www.okbar.org/ethics/ethics-opinion-no-17/

Original opinion text

Reproduced from the official source for research purposes. The linked source is authoritative.

Adopted February 26, 1932

Many inquiries have been received by the State Bar from persons who were non-residents of the State of Oklahoma on the effective date of the State Bar Act, to-wit, June 22nd, 1929, and who have continued since to be non-residents, whose names on that date appeared upon the roll of the Supreme Court as members of the Bar of the State of Oklahoma, as to their status under the Act, and as to their obligations, duties and responsibilities thereunder.

In response to the inquiries:

Section 3 of The State Bar Act provides:

"The members of the State Bar shall be all persons now entitled to practice law in this State."

It is the opinion of the Board of Governors of the State Bar of Oklahoma that the appearance of a name of a person on the roll of the Supreme Court on June 22nd, 1929, was prima facie evidence that that person was entitled to practice law in this State on that date, and continues prima facie evidence of the right of such person to practice law in this State until he has been suspended therefrom or until his enrollment has been revoked or set aside.

That being so, each person whose name appeared upon the Supreme Court roll on June 22nd, 1929 became on that date a member of The State Bar and as such became and is now obligated to pay the fees required by the Act, in lieu of which he "must be suspended from membership in the State Bar."

The Board is of the opinion, however, that it has the discretion to permit such persons enrolled upon the Supreme Court roll-on June 22nd, 1929, who were not residents of the State of Oklahoma on that date and who have since continued to be such non-residents, and who have not complied with the provisions of the State Bar Act to petition the Supreme Court, through the Board of Governors, to strike their names from the roll of the Supreme Court, such persons thereafter not to be subject to the provisions of the State Bar Act.