Admission on Motion After a Move to a Compliance Role
Ethan was admitted to the New York bar in 2017 after graduating from an ABA-approved law school. He practiced commercial litigation in New York for four years. In 2021 he moved to Chicago and took a job as a "compliance analyst" at a bank. His duties involve reviewing regulations and internal policies, but he does not advise clients, appear in court, negotiate legal agreements, or supervise legal work. He files an Illinois admission-on-motion application in 2025. His MPRE score is 78, taken in 2016. He has no discipline, has maintained his New York CLE, and is in good standing in New York. He asks whether he can be admitted without taking the Illinois bar exam.
1. Does Ethan satisfy Rule 705's practice requirement? Analyze the five-year window and whether his compliance job counts as active practice.
Read the worked answer
Ethan likely does not satisfy the practice requirement. Rule 705 generally requires an applicant to have been actively engaged in the practice of law for at least 3 of the 5 years immediately preceding the application. Looking back from 2025, the relevant window is roughly 2020 to 2025. Ethan practiced in New York until 2021, which gives him about one year of clearly qualifying practice in that window. From 2021 to 2025 he worked as a compliance analyst. His duties-reviewing regulations and internal policies-may be law-related, but they do not include advising clients, appearing in court, negotiating legal agreements, or supervising legal work. On those facts, the Board is likely to treat the role as compliance rather than active law practice, so he would have only about one qualifying year, not three. The four years of New York litigation before 2021 do not fill the gap because they fall outside the five-year lookback. Ethan should not assume that a law degree plus a compliance title satisfies the rule; he should document the substance of his duties and be prepared for a denial.
2. What effect does Ethan's MPRE score of 78 have, and what should he do about it?
Read the worked answer
Illinois requires an MPRE score of at least 80 for admission, and Ethan's 2016 score of 78 is below that threshold. The score is also old, and the Board may require a more recent score or may accept a timely score under its rules, but 78 does not satisfy the requirement as stated. Ethan should plan to retake the MPRE and achieve at least 80 before his application can be granted. He should not wait for the Board to reject the application on this ground; he should register for the next MPRE administration and submit the new score directly to Illinois. Passing the MPRE does not cure the practice-requirement problem, but it is a separate and easily fixable defect. If he applies now, he should disclose the 78 and explain that he is retaking the exam, or he should wait until he has a qualifying score to avoid an unnecessary denial.
3. What are Ethan's realistic options if he wants to work in Illinois without taking the full bar exam?
Read the worked answer
He should consider whether his bank employment can support a limited in-house admission under Rule 715. Rule 715 allows a lawyer admitted in another U.S. jurisdiction to practice as in-house counsel for a qualifying employer, with practice limited to the employer's legal matters and subject to employer certification and compliance with Illinois requirements. If the bank will certify that Ethan's role involves providing legal services to the bank and that he will not represent outside clients, Rule 715 may let him work while he addresses the Rule 705 defects. He should also retake the MPRE and, if he later returns to active law practice, build at least three years of qualifying practice within a new five-year window before reapplying on motion. Alternatively, he could sit for the Illinois bar exam. He should not simply continue doing compliance work and describe himself as a practicing Illinois lawyer; that could create unauthorized-practice issues.