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
examination hall
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
Push for Diploma Privilege in New York Intensifies as September Exam Looms
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 All
How Some Elite Law Firms Are Growing Equity Partner Ranks Faster Than Others
4 minute read
Law Firms Expand Scope of Immigration Expertise Amid Blitz of Trump Orders
6 minute readTrending Stories
- 1Leaning Into ‘Core’ Strengths, Jenner’s Revenue Climbs 17%, Profits Soar 23%
- 2Frito Lays Could Face Liability for Customer's Grocery Store Fall Over Pallet Guard, Judge Rules
- 3Holland & Knight Expands Corporate Practice in Texas With Former Greenberg Traurig Partner
- 4Heir Cut: Florida Appellate Court Backs Garth Reeves' Will
- 5Class Action Allowed to Move Forward Against Philadelphia's 'Courtesy Towing' Program, Judge Rules
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
