Michigan Is the Latest to Move July Bar Exam Online
Michigan's pared down online test will consist only of state-specific essay questions.
May 19, 2020 at 01:12 PM
3 minute read
The Michigan Hall of Justice, also known as the Michigan Supreme Court Building in Lansing, Michigan. Photo: Shutterstock
Michigan has joined the small but growing list of jurisdictions that plan to administer the July bar exam online amid the coronavirus pandemic.
The Michigan Supreme Court on Monday ordered that the attorney licensing exam, which normally takes place in person over two days, will be reduced to one day and given remotely July 28. Indiana on May 7 became the first jurisdiction to commit to giving an online bar exam. The Nevada Supreme Court has asked for public comments on a similar plan—under which the test would be open book—and is expected to make a decision by May 22. Massachusetts and California have also said they might give an online bar exam in September, after postponing their July exams. And Utah has created a pathway for some recent graduates to skip the bar exam altogether.
The move demonstrates the extraordinary changes to bar licensing that states are implementing to deal with the unprecedented interruption brought on by the pandemic.
"The board conducted extensive research and consultations to make this decision, including outreach to Michigan public health officials and law school deans, while monitoring developments in the pandemic and approaches of other states," said Michigan Supreme Court Justice Brian Zahra, in an announcement of the decision. Zahra serves that the court's liaison to the Michigan Board of Law Examiners.
The Board of Law Examiners recommended moving the exam online because state health officials could not "predict with certainty that any in-person examination could be safely administered in 2020," according to the announcement. Additionally, predicting the lead-time necessary to secure testing facilities, proctors and safety equipment in the current conditions present significant challenges, the board said. Michigan is a midsize bar exam jurisdiction—641 people sat for the July exam in 2019.
The one-day exam will consist only of Michigan essay questions. It eliminates the Multistate Bar Exam, which is the 200-question multiple choice test that is given over one day. (Michigan is not a Uniform Bar Exam jurisdiction, meaning that the elimination of the Multistate Bar Exam won't compromise the ability of test takers to transfer their scores to other Uniform Bar Exam states since they cannot do so anyway.)
Indiana and Nevada also plan to eliminate the Multistate Bar Exam in their pared-down July exams, as does Louisiana, which is still giving its test in-person, but has reduced it to a single day.
"I am confident the Michigan essay examination will adequately test the applicants' legal knowledge and skill," Zahra said. "The public can be confident that those who pass this exam will have requisite knowledge of state law to become a member of the Michigan bar."
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
'Everything From A to Z': University GCs Tested by Legal, Financial, Societal Challenges
6 minute read
'A Horrible Reputation for Bad Verdicts': Plaintiffs Attorney Breaks Down $129M Wrongful-Death Verdict From Conservative Venue
How Uncertainty in College Athletics Compensation Could Drive Lawsuits in 2025
'Basic Arithmetic': Court Rules in Favor of LA Charter School Denied Funding by California Education Department
Trending Stories
- 1Call for Nominations: Elite Trial Lawyers 2025
- 2Senate Judiciary Dems Release Report on Supreme Court Ethics
- 3Senate Confirms Last 2 of Biden's California Judicial Nominees
- 4Morrison & Foerster Doles Out Year-End and Special Bonuses, Raises Base Compensation for Associates
- 5Tom Girardi to Surrender to Federal Authorities on Jan. 7
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
