Ellen S. v. Florida Board of Bar Examiners
United States District Court for the Southern District of Florida
859 F. Supp. 1489 (1994)

- Written by Miller Jozwiak, JD
Facts
The Florida Board of Bar Examiners (board) (defendant) administered Florida bar applications. Question 29 of the application asked whether an applicant ever sought mental-health treatment. If the applicant answered affirmatively, the process required that applicant to identify all individuals consulted for treatment. A group of individuals (the applicants) (plaintiffs) who hoped to be admitted to the Florida bar sued the board for violating Title II of the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA). The applicants challenged question 29 and the additional inquiries for applicants who answered it affirmatively. In response, the board moved to dismiss for failure to state a claim. The board argued that (1) Florida law required the mental-health inquiry, (2) Title II of the ADA did not prohibit the inquiry, and (3) the board had not actually discriminated against the applicants because the applicants had not been denied bar admission and the board had no knowledge of any disabilities. The board then filed a supplemental motion to dismiss for lack of subject-matter jurisdiction, citing the holding in Clark v. Virginia Board of Bar Examiners. Clark dismissed an ADA Title II claim brought by two rejected bar applicants who had refused to answer a similar mental-health question.
Rule of Law
Issue
Holding and Reasoning (King, J.)
What to do next…
Here's why 815,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
- Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 46,300 briefs, keyed to 988 casebooks. Top-notch customer support.
- The right amount of information, includes the facts, issues, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents.
- Access in your classes, works on your mobile and tablet. Massive library of related video lessons and high quality multiple-choice questions.
- Easy to use, uniform format for every case brief. Written in plain English, not in legalese. Our briefs summarize and simplify; they don’t just repeat the court’s language.