Summary

Willner v. Committee on Character and Fitness…

I concur in the opinion and judgment of the Court believing, as I do, that under all of the circumstances here the petitioner was denied procedural due process which the Constitution demands be accorded by the States to applicants for admission to the bar. No conflict exists between constitutional requisites and exaction of the highest moral standards from those who would practice law.
Source: Wikisource

Willner v. Committee on Character and Fitness…

The constitutional requirements in this context may be simply stated: in all cases in which admission to the bar is to be denied on the basis of character, the applicant, at some stage of the proceedings prior to such denial, must be adequately informed of the nature of the evidence against him and be accorded an adequate opportunity to rebut this evidence. As I understand the opinion of the Court, this does not mean that in every case confrontation and cross-examination are automatically required.
Source: Wikisource

Willner v. Committee on Character and Fitness…

The Court of Appeals pursuant to its rule-making authority (Judiciary Law, § 53 (1) ) has promulgated Rules for the Admission of Attorneys and Counsellors-at-Law, Judiciary Law Appendix which provide, inter alia, that every applicant must produce before the Committee 'evidence that he possesses the good moral character and general fitness requisite for an attorney and counsellor-at-law' (Rule VIII-1) , and that justices of the Appellate Division shall adopt 'such additional rules for ascertaining the moral and general fitness of applicants as to such justices may seem proper.' Rule VIII-4.
Source: Wikisource

Get perspective with Kwize: daily news enlightened by great literature