Wisconsin apparently allows the graduates of in-state law schools to be admitted into practice without taking the bar exam. An out-of-state plaintiff brought a putative class action challenging this practice under the Commerce Clause. After the suit was dismissed, and the plaintiff lodged an appeal, he learned that he had passed the bar exam. Judge Posner, writing for the Seventh Circuit, confirms the basic principle that: “If, on the one hand, the class in a class-action suit is certified before the named plaintiff’s claim becomes moot, the mooting of his claim does not doom the suit. Since the named plaintiff is the representative of the unnamed class members, the evaporation of his claim no more bars him from continuing in that capacity (provided a class has been certified), than a lawyer is barred from representing a litigant just because the lawyer himself has no dispute with the defendant. The named plaintiff who no longer has a stake may not be a suitable class representative, but that is not a matter of jurisdiction and would not disqualify him from continuing as class representative until a more suitable member of the class was found to replace him. If, on the other hand, the named plaintiff’s claim becomes moot before the class is certified, the suit must be dismissed because no one besides the plaintiff has a legally protected interest in the litigation.”  Then, addressing the case at hand: “What if the district court denies the plaintiff’s motion to certify a class, the plaintiff appeals from that denial, and his appeal is pending when his substantive claim evaporates?”  The court concludes that: “The appeal is not moot, because unless and until the appellate court affirms the denial of the motion to certify a class, there may be people other than the plaintiff with a legally protected interest in the suit-namely the unnamed members of the class.” Wiesmueller v. Kosobucki, 513 F.3d 784 (7th Cir. 2008).