About | HeinOnline Law Journal Library | HeinOnline Law Journal Library | HeinOnline
LOG IN
LOG IN

22 Syllabus 1 (1991)

handle is hein.journals/syllabus22 and id is 1 raw text is: American Bar Association Section of Legal Education and Admissions to the Bar Volume XXII, Number 1 Spring 1991 M Pro and National Bar Examination National Scoring System Is Necessary by Norman Krivosha ew, if any, lawyers today, regardless of the area of the country in which they practice, engage in solely local practice of law. Almost every client has some reason to engage in interstate practice. The choice seems to be either to require lawyers to take multiple examinations for reasons that are hard to justify, to violate local laws by engaging in the practice of law without first being admitted to practice, or to establish a reasonable system of licensing which includes a national bar examination, a national scoring system and local character and fitness standards. It is this third option which I actively support. When one gives some thought as to how a bar examination is given and what it can test, one must recognize that the proper function of the examination is limited. The fact that an individual has successfully passed a bar examination gives no more assurance that he or she will ever perform as a competent lawyer than does memorizing the code of professional responsibility assure that one will be an ethical and moral lawyer. A second reason that the bar examination is limited in what it can do is that the law does not remain . Advocates Have Not Proven Necessity for Change by John E. Holt-Harris, Jr. What is the present state of bar examining? To paraphrase Thomas Jefferson in his constitutional dialogue with Samuel Kercheval, there is nothing which entitles it to sanctimonious reverence. It is an arcane art which must constantly be assessed and reassessed. The measure and meaning of the minimal competence standard is inextricably linked to the whole issue of lawyer competence and to the content and predictive validity of the examining techniques which we presently use to determine the standard. We must judiciously retain and improve that which is viable and good, explore new concepts, and discard without reluctance that which has outlived its usefulness. All this is the background against which the feasibility and desirability of establishing a portable uniform standard for all jurisdictions must be measured. Such a standard should not be adopted. Even if it had merit, the present structure of the profession and the present state of the art of bar examining militate against such adoption, as do the disparate and justifiable differences which have led the courts and bar admission authorities to adopt differing constant. The individual must be mindful of changes made by both legislative bodies and courts. In my view a bar examination given to a new graduate can at best determine whether he or she has a sufficient basic understanding of the existence of certain principles of law. We must assume that with this knowledge the individual will be able to recognize the changes and adjust his or her practice accordingly. That can best be determined by administering a national bar examination. Such an examination is already in existence. It is known as the Multistate Bar Examination and, with the exception of four states, is now given in exactly the same form on the same day throughout the United States. What vary are not the questions or the answers, but the scores required for admission. Those numbers when last I checked varied from a scaled score of 115 in Mississippi to a combined essay MBE score of 1260 out of 1800 in California. The reason for choosing any particular score or combination thereof is neither apparent nor logical. Moreover, of the forty-seven jurisdictions that administer the MBE, Continued on page 7 standards in various jurisdictions. As the courts have consistently made clear, each jurisdiction has an overriding interest in establishing and regulating its own bar admission standards after according deference to the requirement of equal protection. Those who advocate change have the burden of proving the necessity for change. Clearly there has been no demand for a uniform standard from those whose interests are most affected: the 'little people who are the warp and woof of our societal demand for legal services. The academy is either apathetic or opposed. Indeed, as Dean Marjorie Fine Knowles acknowledged in a panel discussion held at the ABA Annual Meeting last August, the ability of law schools to prepare students for interstate practice is markedly limited. Nor is the issue of adopting such a standard any part of the agenda of the organized bar. Before a uniform and portable admission standard is adopted, the following issues must be dealt with: 1. A national bar examination would necessarily require the establishment of a national standard Continued on page 7 Policy on Law Students in Gulf Several deans have contacted the office of the Consultant concerning the policies of the Council relating to students called to active duty during Operation Desert Storm. At its August 1942 meeting the Council adopted the following resolution: RESOLVED: That any student who was registered and in attendance at any time in an approved school since September 1st, 1940, and up to the academic year 1941-42, and who while in attendance was called for service under the Selective Service Act, or who entered the armed forces of the United States, or those of any of the United Nations, during the course of such academic year, may be accorded similar residence and hour credit for the work of any incompleted semester, quarter or session, upon the same terms and conditions and to the same extent as provided in emergency resolution Number 1, paragraph four, and the modifications thereof, adopted at the annual meeting of the Association of American Law Schools in December 1941 with reference to students similarly situated in the academic year 1941-42. At its March 1943 meeting the Council adopted the following resolution: During the continuance of the present war, any student in attendance at an approved or provisionally approved school who is called for service under the Selective Service Act, or who enters the armed forces of the United States or of any co- belligerent during the last term of his senior year lacking no more than a half term of residence and hour credit to complete the requirements for graduation, and whose cumulative scholarship record at the time as evidenced in previous final examinations is equal to the average required for graduation, may in the discretion of the member school be granted a degree, provided that: (1) he shall have furnished satisfactory evidence that he entered into service as aforesaid within a reasonable time after he withdrew from the school; and that (2) his work in the term in which his enrollment terminated has been found to be satisfactory. The word term in this resolution includes semester, quarter, trimester, and comparable periods of instruction. All action of member schools under this resolution should be reported to the Acting Advisor at the end of every semester, quarter or session. Continued on page 8

What Is HeinOnline?

HeinOnline is a subscription-based resource containing thousands of academic and legal journals from inception; complete coverage of government documents such as U.S. Statutes at Large, U.S. Code, Federal Register, Code of Federal Regulations, U.S. Reports, and much more. Documents are image-based, fully searchable PDFs with the authority of print combined with the accessibility of a user-friendly and powerful database. For more information, request a quote or trial for your organization below.



Short-term subscription options include 24 hours, 48 hours, or 1 week to HeinOnline.

Purchase Access

Contact us for annual subscription options:

Contact Us

Already a HeinOnline Subscriber?

Log In

profiles profiles most