Slim Majority of Test-Takers Passed California's July Bar Exam
For the first time in six years, a majority of people taking the most recent California bar exam passed, according to results released by the state bar Friday night.
November 15, 2019 at 09:42 PM
4 minute read
For the first time in six years, a majority of people who took the most recent California bar exam passed.
The pass rate on California's July 2019 bar exam climbed to 50.1%, rebounding from a historic low of 40.7% last year, according to figures released by the state bar late Friday.
Though still low in comparison to the success rate in other states, California's passing rate marked the best showing on a July exam since July 2013. Alumni of American Bar Association-approved schools located outside California posted the best pass rate, 73%. Seventy-one percent of applicants from ABA-approved schools in California passed.
The 3,886 applicants who passed the July 2019 exam will be eligible to take the attorney's oath after completing all administrative admission requirements.
Beyond the improved passing score, the July 2019 exam will long be remembered for what happened in the days leading up to the two-day test. On July 27, three days before the exam's start, bar officials were notified that the agency had inadvertently provided the test's essay topics to 16 law school deans. Although there was no evidence the topics were shared with students, bar leaders decided to disclose the subjects to all 9,000 registered test-takers.
A report commissioned by the California Supreme Court and released publicly this week blamed the improper disclosure on human error.
Bar leaders said Friday they retained two testing consultants to review the essay topics' early release, and both concluded that the release had no significant impact on the results.
"The State Bar did not take lightly the decision to release the essay and performance test topics to all test takers, and thus we are relieved by the findings of the psychometricians that statistical analysis demonstrated that the integrity of the examination was not impacted, that performance was as predicted based on historical data, and the passing rate was not affected," Alan Steinbrecher, chairman of the state bar's board of trustees, said in a statement.
The results mirror higher pass rates already reported by other states for the July 2019 exam. Florida, Illinois, Massachusetts, New York, North Dakota, Ohio and Virginia all saw passing rates climb year-over-year from July 2018. New York saw its pass rate climb two percentage points, to 65%.
Florida reported one of the largest jumps besides California's, moving from a pass rate of 67% in 2018 to 74% this July. Similarly, New Jersey saw its pass rate rise seven percentage points to 66%. North Dakota notched the largest increase, 10 percentage points better.
The National Conference of Bar Examiners predicted higher pass rates in early September, when it reported that the national average score on the Multistate Bar Exam, the daylong, multiple-choice portion of the exam administered by almost every state, had increased 1.6 points from the previous year, which represented a 34-year low.
The names of those who passed California's bar exam will be published on the bar's website at 6 a.m. Sunday.
|Read more:
Report Reveals Frantic Scramble After California Bar Exam Blunder
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 AllAs AI-Generated Fraud Rises, Financial Companies Face a Long Cybersecurity Battle
Insurers Dodge Sherwin-Williams' Claim for $102M Lead Paint Abatement Payment, State High Court Rules
Trending Stories
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