## Facts

- Kevin Charles Stern applied for admission to the Maryland bar in 2005.
- Over many years, Stern accumulated substantial consumer debt, including a Discover Card debt later found to exceed $11,000, and defaulted on “tens of thousands of dollars” in obligations.
- Despite having available assets (approximately $65,000), Stern chose not to pay creditors and allowed some debts to be sold to collection agencies.
- After beginning the admissions process, Stern negotiated settlements for many debts for less than the amounts owed and paid some obligations, in part with assistance from family resources.
- The Character Committee found Stern omitted or failed to disclose debts and related lawsuits on law school and bar applications and claimed ignorance of some debts.
- The Character Committee further found Stern’s debt repayment and financial-management steps were largely undertaken to obtain a law license and that he incurred additional debt after applying.
- The moral-character assessment also considered Stern’s poor judgment regarding a relationship with an underage female.
- Following a two-day Character Committee hearing, both the Character Committee and the State Board of Law Examiners recommended denial; Stern sought review in the Court of Appeals of Maryland.

## Issues

1. Whether an applicant demonstrates present good moral character and fitness for admission when the record shows sustained financial irresponsibility and defaults.
2. Whether omissions and misleading responses about debts and related legal matters on law school and bar applications demonstrate a lack of candor inconsistent with bar admission.
3. Whether post-application debt settlements and financial controls establish sufficient rehabilitation to warrant admission despite prior misconduct and continuing financial issues.

## Decision

- The Court of Appeals of Maryland denied Stern’s petition for admission.
- The court agreed with the Character Committee and the Board that Stern did not presently possess the requisite moral character and fitness to practice law.
- The court relied on a long-term pattern of financial irresponsibility, a lack of candor in required disclosures, and insufficient evidence of genuine rehabilitation.

## Legal Principles

- Admission to the bar requires proof of present good moral character and fitness; the applicant bears the burden of showing current fitness.
- Sustained financial irresponsibility and deliberate nonpayment of lawful debts, especially where assets were available, may reflect adversely on judgment and trustworthiness relevant to law practice.
- Candor in bar and law-school applications is mandatory; omissions or misleading answers about debts and related proceedings may independently support denial.
- Remedial actions taken primarily after an application is filed, or motivated chiefly by securing admission, may be discounted when assessing rehabilitation.
- The court gives substantial weight to the Character Committee’s and Board’s character-and-fitness determinations, particularly regarding honesty and credibility.

## Conclusion

The court denied admission because Stern’s prolonged pattern of unpaid debts, lack of full and truthful disclosure in the admissions process, and inadequate, late-arriving rehabilitation efforts failed to establish present moral character and fitness for the Maryland bar.


In re Stern, 403 Md. 615, 943 A.2d 1247 (Md. 2008)