islandpacket.com - The Island Packet Online

• Archive Search

Search Everything in the Lowcountry and the Coastal Empire.

Bar grades changed for 20 people by S.C. Supreme Court

Comment on this | | | | | | | |

COLUMBIA -- The state's top court has changed the grades for 20 people -- including the children of a prominent state lawmaker and a longtime circuit judge-- who earlier flunked the test required to practice law in South Carolina.

The S.C. Supreme Court in last week's order said the wills, trusts and estates section of the July exam would "not be considered" in determining a test-taker's overall score, though the justices gave no reasons for their decision.

The students include the daughters of state Rep. Jim Harrison, R-Richland, chairman of the powerful House Judiciary Committee; and Circuit Judge Paul Burch of Pageland, The (Columbia) State newspaper confirmed Thursday in interviews with the two men.

The newspaper could not confirm the identities of the other 18 with changed grades.

The Supreme Court admits people to the bar and has the final say in grading the exams.

Most other states do not allow scores to be reconsidered after results are published, the court has said.

Supreme Court Chief Justice Jean Toal, who was said to be at an out-of-town conference, did not return three messages left at her office and on her mobile phone.

Both Harrison and Burch said they contacted bar officials about the results. They said their actions were proper.

Harrison said that after his daughter, Catherine, learned she had failed, she began checking with friends who had taken the exam. She found a large number had problems with the test.

On learning that, Harrison said, he called the clerk of the Supreme Court and attorney George Hearn, chairman of the S.C. Board of Law Examiners, which administers the test.

In both cases, Harrison said, he asked if the wills, trusts and estates part of the exam had an unusually high failure rate. A unusually high failure rate may be a sign of a faulty question, or faulty grading, he said.

He said because he was not lobbying for a grade change for an individual, but only bringing a questionable situation that involved a group of students to the attention of authorities, he did nothing that violated the Supreme Court rule that prohibits contact.

The rule says that an applicant "shall not, either directly or through an agent, contact any member or associate member of the Board of Law Examiners or any member of the Supreme Court regarding the questions on any section of the bar examination, grading procedures or an applicant's answers."

| | | | | | |