Opinion · Michigan Supreme Court
Benefiel v. State Board of Law Examiners
402 Mich. 959
- Type
- Opinion
- Court
- Michigan Supreme Court
- Jurisdiction
- Michigan
- Date
- 1978-02-22
- Topic
- general
Plaintiff’s complaint for superintending control is considered, and it is denied, because the Court is not persuaded that the question sought to be presented should be considered by this Court. By the phrase "actively practiced law” in Board of Law Examiners Rule 5(A)(6)(a) we did not intend to encompass practice pursuant to a special regis*960tration procedure like the Patent Office registration under which plaintiff has been permitted to practice before the United States Patent Office while a Michigan resident. See 37 CFR § 1.341. John R. Benefiel, in propria persona, plaintiff.
Citator
UpLaw has not yet analyzed Benefiel v. State Board of Law Examiners. The absence of a flag is not a finding that it is good law.
Plaintiff’s complaint for superintending control is considered, and it is denied, because the Court is not persuaded that the question sought to be presented should be considered by this Court. By the phrase "actively practiced law” in Board of Law Examiners Rule 5(A)(6)(a) we did not intend to encompass practice pursuant to a special regis