New York Cancels September Bar Exam Without Alternative Test in Place
New York joins a slew of other jurisdictions that have canceled planned bar exams amid the COVID-19 pandemic. But it's the first to pull the plug without committing to an online test or a diploma privilege.
July 16, 2020 at 05:08 PM
4 minute read
Add New York to the list of jurisdictions that have canceled their bar exam.
The New York Court of Appeals on Thursday announced the planned Sept. 9 and 10 in-person exam will not happen. The exam was already postponed from late July, when the licensing exam is typically given. Unlike many other jurisdictions that have also canceled their exams this month, New York did not immediately announce plans for an alternative online test or other licensure paths. The impact of the cancellation is likely to ripple across the country, as New York is the single largest bar exam jurisdiction. About 10,000 people typically sit for its July exam.
"The [New York Board of Law Examiners] arrived at this decision after careful consideration of current conditions and with a singular focus on the health and safety of all participants," reads the court's announcement. "Unfortunately, the global pandemic presents a persisting threat in a growing number of states and therefore, at this juncture, an in-person exam is not yet a safe or practical option in New York."
According to the announcement, Chief Judge Janet DiFiore has appointed a working group to evaluate next steps. It is being chaired by retired Court of Appeals Judge Howard A. Levine with a goal of offering a recommendation to the court by early August. The working group will consider a variety of possibilities, including administering the abbreviated online version of the bar exam that is being offered by the National Conference of Bar Examiners on Oct. 5 and 6. The group will also consider an emergency diploma privilege that would allow law graduates to be licensed in the state without passing the bar exam—an option that many examinees have been lobbying for in recent weeks.
The New York State Bar Association said Thursday that it will also review the matter and make a recommendation to the court.
"The class of 2020 has been dealt a difficult hand and many graduates are experiencing stress and strain over the uncertainty surrounding the bar exam, a grim job market, and staggering student debt," said state bar president Scott Karson. "[The state bar] will expeditiously examine the alternatives, taking into account the interests of consumers of legal services as well as the law school graduates seeking admission to the New York bar."
Reaction from bar takers and legal educators came swiftly on Twitter. Allie Robbins, a professor at the City University of New York School of Law, tweeted that the school would continue to help graduates become licensed no matter how long the process takes. She said CUNY Law Dean Mary Lu Bilek would hold a Zoom session Friday to discuss the situation with graduates.
"Cancelling the bar exam with no clear plan demonstrates how far removed from the reality of bar study the Court of Appeals is," Robbins tweeted. "Adding more chaos to this uncertain time is devastating and traumatizing. But you will get through it."
The court earlier adopted a provision allowing those who were signed up to take the July bar exam to temporarily perform legal work under the supervision of a licensed attorney as long as they take the first available bar exam of 2021.
"Because suspension of the September exam has always been a real possibility, the court has proceeded on dual tracks: working towards a safe administration of the exam while simultaneously developing contingencies to ameliorate the effects of further postponement," the court's announcement reads.
New Jersey and Pennsylvania both canceled their in-person September bar exams in the past week and said they would give the October online test. Maryland, Massachusetts and Washington, D.C., were the first to take such action. Florida, Texas, Tennessee, Kentucky and Louisiana have also recently canceled in-person tests that were scheduled to take place this month, with each jurisdiction citing rising COVID-19 cases.
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
© 2025 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 AllThe Met Hires GC of Elite University as Next Legal Chief
NY Appellate Panel Cites Student's Disciplinary History While Sending Negligence Claim Against School District to Trial
'No Evidence'?: Big Law Firms Defend Academic Publishers in EDNY Antitrust Case
3 minute read'Substantive Deficiencies': Judge Grants Big Law Motion Dismissing Ivy League Price-Fixing Claims
3 minute readTrending Stories
- 1How ‘Bilateral Tapping’ Can Help with Stress and Anxiety
- 2How Law Firms Can Make Business Services a Performance Champion
- 3'Digital Mindset': Hogan Lovells' New Global Managing Partner for Digitalization
- 4Silk Road Founder Ross Ulbricht Has New York Sentence Pardoned by Trump
- 5Settlement Allows Spouses of U.S. Citizens to Reopen Removal Proceedings
Who Got The Work
J. Brugh Lower of Gibbons has entered an appearance for industrial equipment supplier Devco Corporation in a pending trademark infringement lawsuit. The suit, accusing the defendant of selling knock-off Graco products, was filed Dec. 18 in New Jersey District Court by Rivkin Radler on behalf of Graco Inc. and Graco Minnesota. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Zahid N. Quraishi, is 3:24-cv-11294, Graco Inc. et al v. Devco Corporation.
Who Got The Work
Rebecca Maller-Stein and Kent A. Yalowitz of Arnold & Porter Kaye Scholer have entered their appearances for Hanaco Venture Capital and its executives, Lior Prosor and David Frankel, in a pending securities lawsuit. The action, filed on Dec. 24 in New York Southern District Court by Zell, Aron & Co. on behalf of Goldeneye Advisors, accuses the defendants of negligently and fraudulently managing the plaintiff's $1 million investment. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Vernon S. Broderick, is 1:24-cv-09918, Goldeneye Advisors, LLC v. Hanaco Venture Capital, Ltd. et al.
Who Got The Work
Attorneys from A&O Shearman has stepped in as defense counsel for Toronto-Dominion Bank and other defendants in a pending securities class action. The suit, filed Dec. 11 in New York Southern District Court by Bleichmar Fonti & Auld, accuses the defendants of concealing the bank's 'pervasive' deficiencies in regards to its compliance with the Bank Secrecy Act and the quality of its anti-money laundering controls. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Arun Subramanian, is 1:24-cv-09445, Gonzalez v. The Toronto-Dominion Bank et al.
Who Got The Work
Crown Castle International, a Pennsylvania company providing shared communications infrastructure, has turned to Luke D. Wolf of Gordon Rees Scully Mansukhani to fend off a pending breach-of-contract lawsuit. The court action, filed Nov. 25 in Michigan Eastern District Court by Hooper Hathaway PC on behalf of The Town Residences LLC, accuses Crown Castle of failing to transfer approximately $30,000 in utility payments from T-Mobile in breach of a roof-top lease and assignment agreement. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Susan K. Declercq, is 2:24-cv-13131, The Town Residences LLC v. T-Mobile US, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Wilfred P. Coronato and Daniel M. Schwartz of McCarter & English have stepped in as defense counsel to Electrolux Home Products Inc. in a pending product liability lawsuit. The court action, filed Nov. 26 in New York Eastern District Court by Poulos Lopiccolo PC and Nagel Rice LLP on behalf of David Stern, alleges that the defendant's refrigerators’ drawers and shelving repeatedly break and fall apart within months after purchase. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Joan M. Azrack, is 2:24-cv-08204, Stern v. Electrolux Home Products, Inc.
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