What Is Pro Hac Vice?

“Pro hac vice” is the phrase courts use when they let a lawyer from outside their jurisdiction appear in a case.

Pro hac vice admission is that permission itself: an authorization to appear rather than a place on the court’s regular bar.

The scope is the point, and it is where the research thins out.

Our research found no single national pro hac vice rule.

What it surfaced — permission granted matter by matter, with requirements such as local counsel, fees and even annual caps set by each state’s rules and each federal court’s local rules — it could not confirm from a primary source, so treat the mechanics in one courthouse as telling you little about the next.

One federal district court shows how concrete those mechanics get.

In the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York (S.D.N.Y.), pro hac vice motions are filed electronically through CM/ECF with a notarized affidavit and a certificate of good standing, and a separate motion is required for each attorney applicant.

That is one court’s procedure, offered as an example rather than a national rule.

Read it as an illustration of what a court’s motion can ask for, not as a template for the next court.

Regular admission is a separate track — federal district courts set their own attorney admission rules by local rule, and the national fee for joining a district court’s bar appears in the costs section below.

The situation is easy to recognize: you are admitted in one jurisdiction, and a case lands in a court where you are not.

That court could be another state’s court, or a federal district court — which sets its own attorney admission rules by local rule.

To appear in that one case, the route is a pro hac vice motion to that court, not admission to its bar.

Two boundaries keep the definition honest.

Our research pointed to a matter-by-matter permission — a new case in the same court calling for its own motion — but could not confirm that from a primary source.

The per-attorney point is firmer: S.D.N.Y., for example, requires a separate motion for each attorney applicant, so a multi-lawyer team files one motion per lawyer.

Pro hac vice fits the occasional outside appearance.

When the move is durable — relocating a practice, or expecting repeated appearances in one jurisdiction — regular admission to that jurisdiction’s bar is the standing alternative, with requirements of its own (see bar admission requirements by state).

The attorney career guide covers the role those moves sit inside.

Local counsel was one of the requirement types our research surfaced, apparently set by each state’s rules and each federal court’s local rules.

Whether a court requires local counsel, who qualifies and what that lawyer has to do follow the court’s own rules rather than any single national rule our research found.

Our research could not verify a uniform local-counsel requirement from a primary source, so treat it as unconfirmed until you read the specific court’s rules.

Where a court does require local counsel, the practical effect for a firm is straightforward: another lawyer is on the matter, with the coordination that comes with one.

Pro hac vice admission is narrow, though how narrow appears to vary court by court and is only partly documented:

• One matter. Our research pointed to a matter-by-matter structure — a different case meaning a new motion in that court — but could not confirm it from a primary source.
• One court. Our research found each court granting, and limiting, its own — a structure it could not confirm from a primary source.
• Not bar membership. Pro hac vice is permission to appear, not a place on that court’s bar or on the state bar where it sits. The lawyer’s license stays in the jurisdiction that granted it.
• Per attorney. S.D.N.Y. requires a separate motion for each attorney applicant — one concrete example of how the per-lawyer mechanics work.
• Disclosures are part of the motion. S.D.N.Y.’s affidavit must disclose any felony conviction and any censure, suspension, disbarment or denial of admission — an example of what one court’s motion asks an applicant to disclose.
• Possible caps. Our research flagged annual caps among the requirement types courts may set, without confirming them from a primary source; no uniform number is documented, so any cap question goes to the specific court.

The honest answer is that fees appear to be court-set.

Our research found no single national pro hac vice fee to quote: fees appear to be set by each state’s rules and each federal court’s local rules, so any fee that applies sits on the specific court’s own schedule.

Two figures from the federal district courts frame what is documented nationally — and neither is itself a pro hac vice fee:

• $199 — the national Judicial Conference fee for original admission to a federal district court’s bar, effective December 1, 2023. That is regular admission — the standing route a pro hac vice motion stands in for.
• $21 — a federal district court certificate of good standing under the Judicial Conference fee schedule. That is the price of that one certificate: S.D.N.Y. asks pro hac vice applicants to file a certificate of good standing with the motion, but our research did not establish which court or bar must issue it, so don’t read $21 as part of a pro hac vice filing.

Budget, then, for whatever motion fee the court charges plus the documents it requires — and, in courts like S.D.N.Y., for the per-attorney rule, which multiplies the paperwork when more than one lawyer appears.

The current numbers live with each court; our research found no national schedule of pro hac vice fees to quote from.

Career information for attorneys and law firms, not legal advice. Pro hac vice requirements and fees appear to be set court by court — confirm the current ones with the court where the case sits before you rely on anything here.