California Postpones Bar Exam Until September, Pushes for Online Test
"These adjustments recognize and will advance the manifest public interest in maintaining access to justice through competent and qualified legal services," the California Supreme Court said.
April 27, 2020 at 03:00 PM
3 minute read
California's July bar exam will be delayed until September and the state bar "shall make every effort possible" to administer the test online with a combination of electronic and remote proctoring, the state Supreme Court announced Monday.
In a three-page letter to state bar president Alan Steinbrecher signed by Supreme Court clerk Jorge Navarette, the court did not offer diploma privilege to graduating law school students, an option that would have allowed them to practice law without passing the bar exam. The justices did, however, say that if the September exam becomes infeasible, they will consider "altering or amending these directives."
"The court … has taken into account the health and safety issues presented by the COVID-19 pandemic, and the enormous challenges this public health crisis has placed before those who seek admission to the California bar, including the graduating law school class of 2020," the letter said.
"These circumstances, the court has concluded, require that the bar adjust its examination procedures. These adjustments recognize and will advance the manifest public interest in maintaining access to justice through competent and qualified legal services," the court concluded.
The court directed other testing changes:
>>> The bar will work with the National Conference of Bar Examiners to administer the September 2020 multistate bar exam portion of the test "or some variation thereof" online.
>>> The bar will allow those registered to take the exam to withdraw with a full refund of testing fees through Sept. 8.
>>> The bar will make "every effort possible" to announce test results by Dec. 31. Normally, results for the July exam are typically not released until four months later in November.
>>> The June 2020 first-year law school students' exam, also known as the baby bar, will continue as planned with a combination of online and remote proctoring. The court ordered the bar to give students required to take the test four opportunities to pass instead of the current limit of three.
>>> The October 2020 baby bar will be postponed until November 2020 so graders can focus on the September 2020 bar exam.
>>> The state bar will submit by May 11 a plan to ensure that the July baby bar and the September bar exam can be administered online.
The court did not endorse law school deans' request for a provisional licensing program for graduating 3Ls.
"Before the current pandemic, possible alterations to the bar exam were on the court's agenda for consideration and remain so as studies concerning the examination continue to reach their conclusion," Navarette wrote. "The court remains committed to making an informed judgement concerning the future of the bar examination when the circumstances are appropriate."
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 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
- 1Infant Formula Judge Sanctions Kirkland's Jim Hurst: 'Overtly Crossed the Lines'
- 2Election 2024: Nationwide Judicial Races and Ballot Measures to Watch
- 3Guarantees Are Back, Whether Law Firms Want to Talk About Them or Not
- 4How I Made Practice Group Chair: 'If You Love What You Do and Put the Time and Effort Into It, You Will Excel,' Says Lisa Saul of Forde & O'Meara
- 5Abbott, Mead Johnson Win Defense Verdict Over Preemie Infant Formula
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