NYSBA to Study if Move to Uniform Bar Exam Led to a Rise in Lawyers Unprepared to Practice
'To me, it is unfathomable that practitioners who plan to practice in New York would start their careers without the most basic knowledge of the rules that govern almost every aspect of practice in the New York State Courts,' said state Supreme Court Justice Barry Ostrager of the commercial division.
April 01, 2019 at 03:00 AM
4 minute read
The original version of this story was published on New York Law Journal
Responding to anecdotal evidence that new lawyers don't understand the rules for practicing in New York courts, the state bar association is announcing Monday that it's creating a task force to study whether the adoption of the Uniform Bar Exam is responsible.
Presiding Justice Alan Scheinkman of the Appellate Division, Second Department, and Eileen Millett, former co-chair of NYSBA's committee on legal education and admission to the bar, will chair the study group.
“We don't approach this from a point of a prejudgment,” Scheinkman said. ”We're not certain there is a problem. We're not certain there isn't a problem. We're trying to find out about it.”
What is clear is this: Nearly three years after the test debuted, some judges, lawyers and educators are bemoaning the impact. In meetings and lectures, judges are talking openly about the lack of knowledge possessed by lawyers appearing before them.
No one knows whether the perceived deficiencies are caused by the lack of rigor of the Uniform Bar Exam itself, deficiencies in the 50 multiple choice question open-book test on New York law that accompanies the multistate test, or the precipitous drop in the percentage of students studying New York practice.
At one time, 80 to 90 percent of students at some New York law schools would take a course in New York practice; some law schools say that number has declined to less than 20 percent.
Earlier this month during a lecture at Fordham School of Law, state Supreme Court Justice Barry Ostrager of the commercial division said he was shocked by the situation.
“To me, it is unfathomable that practitioners who plan to practice in New York would start their careers without the most basic knowledge of the rules that govern almost every aspect of practice in the New York state courts, he said.
“By contrast, courses on Federal Practice and Federal Jurisdiction are very popular in law school. But, a much higher percentage of the cases that New York practitioners handle are venued in New York Supreme Court, not federal court,” he said.
He said his law clerks receive half a dozen calls a day from lawyers asking for information that they should know or easily be able to find in the New York Civil Practice Law and Rules. These new lawyers don't know, for instance, not to serve both a bill of particulars and a set of interrogatories on their adversaries, he said.
“If students are no longer taking NY practice, then we really have lost something of value,” said Millett, who added that knowledge of New York law is necessary for the state courts to remain a pre-eminent destination for settling international commercial transactions.
Millett, a partner at Phillips Nizer, added that the changing economics of the profession is also having an impact on the lack of preparation judges are encountering. With more students going to law school, the competition has intensified and some can't find jobs in the kinds of firms that train beginning lawyers before sending them to court.
“We've had concerns right from the get-go,” said New York State Bar Association president Michael Miller. “The state bar had recommended that the UBE not be instituted as proposed and that there be a two-year study since it would be a historic departure.”
When the proposal to adopt the Uniform Bar Exam was made in 2014, the state bar expressed concern that the change might worsen the disparity between how students of different races performed. The association was also concerned right from the start about the impact of the switch on knowledge of New York law and professional practice.
“There are nuances in New York practice that are the difference between being ready and having to learn some pretty elementary things when you come out of law school,” he said.
St. John's University School of Law Dean Michael Simons said that changing what you test has had a significant impact on what law school students study.
“Students want to pass the bar exam and they are rational consumers and it's to be expected that students will arrange their academic program to best prepare themselves for the bar,” he said. “There's no question there's a relationship between what students will be asked to demonstrate on the licensing exam and what they're going put their energy into in law school.”
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
NOT FOR REPRINT
© 2024 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.
You Might Like
View All'A Template' for Religious Accommodation: Attorney Gives Insight to $12M Win Over Employer's COVID-19 Vaccination Policies
5th Circuit Judge Jones Slams Proposal for Greater Amicus Brief Funding Disclosure
Federal Judge Rejects Teams' Challenge to NASCAR's 'Anticompetitive Terms' in Agreement
Trending Stories
- 1Elon Musk Names Microsoft, Calif. AG to Amended OpenAI Suit
- 2Trump’s Plan to Purge Democracy
- 3Baltimore City Govt., After Winning Opioid Jury Trial, Preparing to Demand an Additional $11B for Abatement Costs
- 4X Joins Legal Attack on California's New Deepfakes Law
- 5Monsanto Wins Latest Philadelphia Roundup Trial
Who Got The Work
Michael G. Bongiorno, Andrew Scott Dulberg and Elizabeth E. Driscoll from Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale and Dorr have stepped in to represent Symbotic Inc., an A.I.-enabled technology platform that focuses on increasing supply chain efficiency, and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The case, filed Oct. 2 in Massachusetts District Court by the Brown Law Firm on behalf of Stephen Austen, accuses certain officers and directors of misleading investors in regard to Symbotic's potential for margin growth by failing to disclose that the company was not equipped to timely deploy its systems or manage expenses through project delays. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Nathaniel M. Gorton, is 1:24-cv-12522, Austen v. Cohen et al.
Who Got The Work
Edmund Polubinski and Marie Killmond of Davis Polk & Wardwell have entered appearances for data platform software development company MongoDB and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The action, filed Oct. 7 in New York Southern District Court by the Brown Law Firm, accuses the company's directors and/or officers of falsely expressing confidence in the company’s restructuring of its sales incentive plan and downplaying the severity of decreases in its upfront commitments. The case is 1:24-cv-07594, Roy v. Ittycheria et al.
Who Got The Work
Amy O. Bruchs and Kurt F. Ellison of Michael Best & Friedrich have entered appearances for Epic Systems Corp. in a pending employment discrimination lawsuit. The suit was filed Sept. 7 in Wisconsin Western District Court by Levine Eisberner LLC and Siri & Glimstad on behalf of a project manager who claims that he was wrongfully terminated after applying for a religious exemption to the defendant's COVID-19 vaccine mandate. The case, assigned to U.S. Magistrate Judge Anita Marie Boor, is 3:24-cv-00630, Secker, Nathan v. Epic Systems Corporation.
Who Got The Work
David X. Sullivan, Thomas J. Finn and Gregory A. Hall from McCarter & English have entered appearances for Sunrun Installation Services in a pending civil rights lawsuit. The complaint was filed Sept. 4 in Connecticut District Court by attorney Robert M. Berke on behalf of former employee George Edward Steins, who was arrested and charged with employing an unregistered home improvement salesperson. The complaint alleges that had Sunrun informed the Connecticut Department of Consumer Protection that the plaintiff's employment had ended in 2017 and that he no longer held Sunrun's home improvement contractor license, he would not have been hit with charges, which were dismissed in May 2024. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Jeffrey A. Meyer, is 3:24-cv-01423, Steins v. Sunrun, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Greenberg Traurig shareholder Joshua L. Raskin has entered an appearance for boohoo.com UK Ltd. in a pending patent infringement lawsuit. The suit, filed Sept. 3 in Texas Eastern District Court by Rozier Hardt McDonough on behalf of Alto Dynamics, asserts five patents related to an online shopping platform. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Rodney Gilstrap, is 2:24-cv-00719, Alto Dynamics, LLC v. boohoo.com UK Limited.
Featured Firms
Law Offices of Gary Martin Hays & Associates, P.C.
(470) 294-1674
Law Offices of Mark E. Salomone
(857) 444-6468
Smith & Hassler
(713) 739-1250