ILNews

IBA: MPRE Prep Free

Back to TopCommentsE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

For ten years now a passing score on the Multistate Professional Responsibility Exam (MPRE) has been required for admission to the Indiana Bar. Essentially the ethics exam for those seeking to practice law; the MPRE is administered three times a year, and as always the Indianapolis Bar Association’s IndyBar Review is helping student members of the Association prepare with a MPRE Review Course scheduled for Friday, February 18 from 1:30 p.m. to 4:30 p.m. at the Bar office.

Taught by Jake Bradley of Frost Brown Todd, the review course provides those attending with insight into how the exam is scored and a logical review of the material tested.

According to the National Board of Law Examiners, the MPRE is based on the law governing the conduct of lawyers, including the disciplinary rules of professional conduct currently articulated in the ABA Model Rules of Professional Conduct, the ABA Model Code of Judicial Conduct, and controlling constitutional decisions and generally accepted principles established in leading federal and state cases and in procedural and evidentiary rules.

The MPRE consists of 60 multiple-choice questions. There are 50 scored questions and 10 nonscored pretest questions.

Do law students successfully pass the MPRE without a review course? Yes, but IndyBar offers a free MPRE Review Course to those pre-enrolled in its full Bar Review Course. To over prepare would be a waste of time, but investing three hours on a Friday afternoon to gain insight from the Bar Association is like being handed a free insurance policy.

Those interested in attending may register online at www.indybar.org or contact Kari Hartman at khartman@indybar.org for more information.•

ADVERTISEMENT

Post a comment to this story

COMMENTS POLICY
We reserve the right to remove any post that we feel is obscene, profane, vulgar, racist, sexually explicit, abusive, or hateful.
 
You are legally responsible for what you post and your anonymity is not guaranteed.
 
Posts that insult, defame, threaten, harass or abuse other readers or people mentioned in Indiana Lawyer editorial content are also subject to removal. Please respect the privacy of individuals and refrain from posting personal information.
 
No solicitations, spamming or advertisements are allowed. Readers may post links to other informational websites that are relevant to the topic at hand, but please do not link to objectionable material.
 
We may remove messages that are unrelated to the topic, encourage illegal activity, use all capital letters or are unreadable.
 

Messages that are flagged by readers as objectionable will be reviewed and may or may not be removed. Please do not flag a post simply because you disagree with it.

Sponsored by
ADVERTISEMENT
Subscribe to Indiana Lawyer
  1. As one of the many consumers affected by this breach, I found my bank data had been lifted and used to buy over $200 of various merchandise in New York. I did a pretty good job of tracing the purchases to stores around a college campus just from the info on my bank statement. Hm. Mr. Hill, I would like my $200 back! It doesn't belong to the state, in my opinion. Give it back to the consumers affected. I had to freeze my credit and take out data protection, order a new debit card and wait until it arrived. I deserve something for my trouble!

  2. Don't we have bigger issues to concern ourselves with?

  3. Anyone who takes the time to study disciplinary and bar admission cases in Indiana ... much of which is, as a matter of course and by intent, off the record, would have a very difficult time drawing lines that did not take into account things which are not supposed to matter, such as affiliations, associations, associates and the like. Justice Hoosier style is a far departure than what issues in most other parts of North America. (More like Central America, in fact.) See, e.g., http://www.theindianalawyer.com/indiana-attorney-illegally-practicing-in-florida-suspended-for-18-months/PARAMS/article/42200 When while the Indiana court system end the cruel practice of killing prophets of due process and those advocating for blind justice?

  4. Wouldn't this call for an investigation of Government corruption? Chief Justice Loretta Rush, wrote that the case warranted the high court’s review because the method the Indiana Court of Appeals used to reach its decision was “a significant departure from the law.” Specifically, David wrote that the appellate panel ruled after reweighing of the evidence, which is NOT permissible at the appellate level. **But yet, they look the other way while an innocent child was taken by a loving mother who did nothing wrong"

  5. Different rules for different folks....

ADVERTISEMENT