IN RE: ARMER ANUMIHE BRIGHT
Annotate this Case
Download PDF
FOR IMMEDIATE NEWS RELEASE NEWS RELEASE # 76 FROM: CLERK OF SUPREME COURT OF LOUISIANA The Opinions handed down on the 31st day of October, 2003, are as follows: PER CURIAM: 2002-OB-2313 IN RE: ARMER ANUMIHE BRIGHT (Committee on Bar Admissions) Accordingly, it is ordered that the application for admission is denied. 10/31/03 SUPREME COURT OF LOUISIANA NO. 02-OB-2313 IN RE: ARMER ANUMIHE BRIGHT ON APPLICATION FOR ADMISSION TO THE BAR PER CURIAM Petitioner, Armer Anumihe Bright, successfully passed the essay portion of the July 1999 Louisiana Bar Examinatio n . Ho wev er, the Committee on Bar Admissions ( Committee ) refused to certify his good moral ch aract er because criminal charges were then pending against him for insurance fraud (five felony counts). W e deferred consideration of petitioner s ap p lication for admission until the criminal case was concluded. On July 17, 2000, pursuant to a plea ag reemen t, petitioner pleaded guilty to one count of misdemeanor theft. He was sentenced to six months imprisonment, susp en ded, subject to a two-year period of unsupervised probation with special conditions, including the requirement that he pay restitution to Travelers In s urance Company in the amount of $6,958.84 and that he refrain fro m s eeking admission to the bar fo r a p eriod of two years. Petitioner subsequently requested that he be permitted to withdraw his petition for admission to the practice of law. We granted his motion on October 11, 2000. In re: Bright, 99-3022 (La. 10/11/00), 770 So. 2d 335. Two years later, on September 5, 2002, petitioner applied for the appointment of a commissioner in the instant matter. On October 16, 2002, we appointed a commissioner to take evidence and report to this court whether petitioner has the appropriate character and fitness to be admitted to the b ar an d allowed to practice law in the State of Louisiana. We also authorized the Office of Dis cip lin ary Counsel to conduct an investigation into petitioner's qualifications to be admitted to the bar. After hearing eviden ce in t h e case, the commissioner filed his report with this court, recommending petitioner be denied admission to the practice of law excep t upon his participatio n in a mentor program. Both petitioner and the Committee objected to that recommendation, and oral argument was conducted befo re t h is court pursuant to Supreme Court Rule XVII, § 9(B)(3). After hearing oral argument, reviewing the evidence, and considering the law, we conclude petitioner has failed to meet his burden of proving that he h as good moral charact er to be admitted to the Louisiana State Bar Association. See Supreme Court Rule XVII, § 5(E). Accordingly, it is ordered that the application for admission is denied. 2
Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
