Read What California-Licensed Lawyers Said About Lowering the Exam Score
Thousands of California-licensed lawyers responded to the state bar's call for public comment about whether the bar exam score should be lowered or kept right where it is. Attorneys offered varying thoughts. Here's a snapshot of some of what members of the bar had to say.
September 08, 2017 at 07:57 PM
7 minute read
After months of studying the heated issue, California's state bar told state Supreme Court justices this week that they could justifiably lower the bar exam pass score. Or, just as justifiably, they could leave it where it is, the bar said.
As the Supreme Court mulls what to do, many California-licensed lawyers have already made clear that they want the 144 pass score, also known as a cut score, to stay right where it is. More than 34,000 attorneys responded to a recent bar survey about the issue. Nearly 80 percent of those respondents said the bar shouldn't lower the cut score despite pressure from law school deans, students and lawmakers to do just that.
Lawyers, mostly writing for themselves and not their firms or organizations, flooded the bar with public comments—emails, online survey responses and letters—that are posted on the bar's website.
Here are some excerpts—in categories we created—of what some of those California lawyers told bar officials in the public comments:
Wait a second … Maybe the score is too high.
Jody Brewster, Skadden, Arps, Slate, Meagher & Flom: “As a partner in a very large law firm, I have witnessed highly competent practicing attorneys licensed in other jurisdictions prepare for and fail the CA bar exam. I have also been privy to the scores some of these applicants received, and it was clear that had they taken the bar exam in almost any other state in the country they would have passed. The result is that it is extremely difficult to relocate attorneys to CA based on the needs of the firm and our clients, even though the attorney has already demonstrated much more than the minimal competency required to practice law.”
Marti Potiriades, Office of Sacramento County Counsel: “Real people, young people, have put their lives on hold, have incurred thousands of dollars in student loans, have incurred thousands in bar prep classes, lost time with their families, have job applications in suspense, due to the extreme length of law school itself, compounded by sadistic standards, compounded by intolerable waiting time for results. As a practicing attorney with a child now waiting for bar results, I support the view of the 20 CA law school deans who endorse immediate, meaningful changes.”
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 AllCoalition of AGs Support Updates to ABA's Legal Education Diversity Standard
3 minute readCalifornia Supreme Court Rejects State Bar's Initial Plan for New Bar Exam
4 minute readGovernor Signs Legislation Raising Lawyers' Licensing Fees by $88 in 2025
3 minute readCalifornia Bar Wants to Offer Exam Score Boosts, Payments to Sample Test Guinea Pigs
4 minute readTrending Stories
- 1Troutman Pepper, Claiming Ex-Associate's Firing Was Performance Related, Seeks Summary Judgment in Discrimination Suit
- 2Law Firm Fails to Get Punitive Damages From Ex-Client
- 3Over 700 Residents Near 2023 Derailment Sue Norfolk for More Damages
- 4Decision of the Day: Judge Sanctions Attorney for 'Frivolously' Claiming All Nine Personal Injury Categories in Motor Vehicle Case
- 5Second Judge Blocks Trump Federal Funding Freeze
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