New York to Hold Online Bar Exam
A court-appointed working group rejected a temporary diploma privilege option, "noting that the bar exam provides critical assurance to the public that admitted attorneys meet minimum competency requirements," the court said.
July 23, 2020 at 05:22 PM
3 minute read
New York is moving forward with an online bar exam this fall, a week after it canceled the September test with no alternative.
The New York Court of Appeals on Thursday announced it would administer the state bar exam remotely on October 5 and 6 as a one-time, emergency option. The news comes after the jurisdiction canceled its in-person exam, which was rescheduled from late July for September 9 and 10, citing the impracticality of holding it during a global pandemic.
In scheduling the online exam, the court said that a court-appointed working group considered multiple alternatives to licensure, including an emergency diploma privilege that has been championed by examinees in recent weeks and postponing the examination until February 2021. However, even after acknowledging the shortcomings of a remote exam, the working group deemed it to be the best alternative, the court said.
"The working group rejected a temporary diploma privilege option, noting that the bar exam provides critical assurance to the public that admitted attorneys meet minimum competency requirements, emphasizing New York's immense candidate pool as well as the degree of variation in legal curricula across the country," the court said in its announcement.
A growing number of jurisdictions during the past month have canceled their in-person July or September bar exams in favor of an abbreviated online version in October that's being prepared by the National Conference of Bar Examiners. They include California, Illinois, Pennsylvania, Ohio, Massachusetts, New Jersey, Connecticut, Maryland, Washington D.C., Vermont, New Hampshire, Kentucky and Tennessee. Several more jurisdictions are giving examinees the option to take the online October test, including Texas, Arizona, and Oregon.
For the online exam, the New York court said the working group consulted with technology, security and psychometric experts and "discussed proactive measures to ensure broad access, mitigate security risks and establish a reliable grading methodology."
The working group recommended that the court look into offering reciprocity to other jurisdictions administering the online bar exam. Many other jurisdictions, including New Jersey and Washington D.C., have entered into reciprocity agreements.
Everyone registered for the September exam will be automatically registered for the remote October exam, the court said, and waiver-request consideration will be given to JD candidates who graduated in 2019 or later; previously took the exam in New York and failed no more than twice; and who wish to sit for the online examination.
|Read More
New York Cancels September Bar Exam Without Alternative Test in Place
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 AllWhy Is It Becoming More Difficult for Businesses to Mandate Arbitration of Employment Disputes?
6 minute readEuropean, US Litigation Funding Experts Look for Commonalities at NYU Event
Trending Stories
- 1Waterbury Jury Awards $2 Million Verdict Against Eversource
- 2Walter Taggart, Villanova Law Professor, Dies at 81
- 3$2.7M Verdict for Whistleblower Exposes Employer to $300M Claim
- 4Phila. Med Mal Lawyers In for Busy Year as Court Adjusts for Filing Boom
- 5Bonus Parade Continues, With Additional Firms Matching Milbank
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