Skip to main content

Changes to the Bar Exam Coming in 2015

By

Current 1L students, or anyone planning to take the Texas (or another state's) Bar Exam in 2015 or after ought to pay close attention in their Federal Civil Procedure courses. Beginning with the February 2105 exam, the Multistate Bar Exam will add Federal civil procedure to the list of subjects tested. Every jurisdiction, with the exception of Louisiana, uses the Multistate Bar Exam (MBE) as part of their examination of attorney hopefuls. Currently, the MBE covers constitutional law, contracts, criminal law, evidence, real property, and torts. For the current 200 question test, 190 of the questions are scored, with 31 to 33 questions devoted to each subject. Test takers have three hours to complete the first 100 questions, and after a break, another three hours to answer the remaining one hundred questions. In Texas, the MBE is administered on the second day of the bar exam, with the first day devoted to the Multistate Performance Test, as well as the Texas Procedure and Evidence Exam. On the third day, Texas bar examinees answer twelve essay questions on topics including business associations, trusts and guardianships, wills, family law, consumer law, and real property.  The addition of federal civil procedure questions will not add to the length of the test, instead the number of questions for each subject will decrease slightly, to 28 questions on contracts, and 27 questions on the other subjects.

 The institution that writes and administers the MBE, the National Conference of Bar Examiners (NCBE), was formed in 1931. Created at behest of the American Bar Association’s Section of Legal Education and Admissions to the Bar, during a time when the ABA was seeking uniformity among state standards for admitting new lawyers, the NCBE was formed with the aim of applying reasonable and uniform standards of education and character for eligibility for admission to the practice of law. Today, the NCBE is responsible for producing not only the Multistate Bar Exam, but also the Multistate Essay Exam (used by about ½ of U.S. jurisdictions), the Multistate Performance Test, and the Multistate Professional Responsibility Exam. The NCBE has also created the Uniform Bar Exam, which includes the Multistate Performance Test, Multistate Essay Exam, and Multistate Bar Exam. The Uniform Bar Exam has been adopted by thirteen jurisdictions.  

Though some have complained that the change to add federal civil procedure to the MBE will result in double-testing of the subject, this does not appear to be a problem for Texas bar examinees. The Multistate Essay Exam, which Texas does not administer in lieu of its own essay questions, already includes federal civil procedure as a potential essay topic. The Multistate Essay Exam will be used by thirty states and U.S. territories by 2014, but there is no evidence that Texas will be joining those ranks anytime soon. Currently, federal civil procedure is not listed as a test topic in the appendix to the Texas bar exam rules (Appendix A- Texas Bar Exam Subjects). Instead, Federal criminal procedure, Texas criminal procedure, and Texas civil procedure are the only topics listed for testing as part of the Texas Procedure and Evidence Exam.

While there is no doubt that the various bar preparation companies will do their best to prepare students taking the bar exam in 2015 and beyond for this addition to the MBE, students beginning their law school careers may want to devote even more attention to the notoriously complex first year course.

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

The Amazing, but True, Deportation Story of Carlos Marcello

By
Earlier this week, the University of Houston Law Center was fortunate to have as its guest Professor Daniel Kanstroom of Boston College of Law. An expert in immigration law, he is the Director of the International Human Rights Program, and he both founded and directs the Boston College Immigration and Asylum Clinic. Speaking as the guest of the Houston Journal of International Law’s annual Fall Lecture Series, Professor Kanstroom discussed issues raised in his new book, Aftermath: Deportation Law and the New American Diaspora . Professor Michael Olivas introduced Professor Kanstroom to the audience, and mentioned the fascinating tale of Carlos Marcello, which Professor Kanstroom wrote about in his chapter “The Long, Complex, and Futile Deportation Saga of Carlos Marcello,” in Immigration Stories , a collection of narratives about leading immigration law cases. My interest piqued, I read and was amazed by Kanstroom’s description of one of the most interesting figures in American le
1 comment
Read more

C-SPAN Video Archive Now Online

By
Legislative researchers and politics fans take note. C-SPAN recently completed a digitization project placing the entirety of its video collection online. The archives record all three C-SPAN networks seven days a week, twenty-four hours a day. The videos are available at no cost for historical, educational, research, and archival uses. The database includes over 160,000 hours of video recorded since 1987 and the programs are indexed by subject, speaker names, titles, affiliations, sponsors, committees, categories, formats, policy groups, keywords, and locations. The most recent, most watched, and most shared videos are highlighted on the main page. To start watching, visit the C-SPAN Video Library and use the search function at the top of the page.
Post a Comment
Read more

Texas Subsequent History Table Ceases Publication

By
This week, Thomson Reuters notified subscribers that publication of the Texas Subsequent History Table will be discontinued and no further updates will be produced, due to “insufficient market interest.” Practitioners have been extracting writ (and since 1997, petition) history from the tables since their initial publication in 1917 as The Complete Texas Writs of Error Table . The tables, later published by West, have been used for nearly a century to determine how the Texas Supreme Court or Court of Criminal Appeals disposed of an appeal from an intermediate appellate court. The purpose of adding this notation to citations is to indicate the effect of the Texas Supreme Court’s action on the weight of authority of the Court of Appeals’ opinion.  For example, practitioners may prefer to use as authority a case that the Texas Supreme Court has determined is correct both in result and legal principles applied (petition refused), rather than one that simply presents no error that requires
Post a Comment
Read more