ILNews

Proposed changes to the Indiana Bar Exam are sparking debate

Back to TopCommentsE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

Between law school graduation and admittance to the practice of law stands the bar exam. Two long days of intense testing, coming after months of nonstop preparation, are a key piece in ultimately determining who is competent to be a lawyer.

Not surprising, changes to the exam can be viewed as significant if not monumental. The last time Indiana altered its bar exam was more than 10 years ago when the test switched from all essay to a combination of essay and multiple choice questions.

laramore Laramore

Once again, the essay portion is the focus of a new set of changes proposed by the Indiana Board of Law Examiners.

“Our job is to ensure lawyers admitted to practice in Indiana meet a standard of minimum competence,” said board president Jon Laramore, explaining the reason behind the proposed changes. “After writing and grading the essay questions of the bar exam over many years, the board concluded we should re-examine what subjects should be tested to best measure minimum competence.”

The Indianapolis Bar Association, the only nonprofit to offer a bar exam review course, applauded the board for taking an open-minded review of the test. However, in a letter detailing its response to the proposed changes, the association raised concerns about the exam potentially losing its focus on Indiana law.

The IBA stated the value of the bar exam is that it provides the last – and for many students the first – opportunity to become competent in Indiana law. The 2001 partial shift in focus from exclusive Indiana law topics to some national law questions in the multiple choice portion of the test has diminished those opportunities, leaving Indiana more at risk for having new admittees who do not know Indiana law. By focusing more on the “national” nature of certain areas of the law, new Indiana attorneys will not have knowledge of the unique Indiana laws governing their clients, the IBA wrote.

Along with the IBA, the Indiana State Bar Association and the Marion County Bar Association offered their views of the proposed changes. These organizations are among the individuals and groups who provided feedback.

Like the IBA, the state bar association added its support to making periodic changes to the bar exam. However, it advocated that any changes be made after considering not only objective data but also emerging trends for solo and small firm lawyers.

The board has made no final decision regarding the changes, but Laramore is pleased with the feedback the board received.

“I think our proposal generated a lot of discussion,” he said. “We received a nice cross section of comments.”

Taxing concerns

The Indiana Bar Exam requires applicants to write eight essays on the first day of testing: two for the Multistate Performance Test and six for the Indiana Essay Examination. The second day is devoted to the multiple choice questions of the Multistate Bar Examination.

The board suggests altering the list of subjects from which potential questions could be drawn in the IEE section. Under the proposal, commercial law, personal property and taxation would be deleted from the list of potential topics and replaced with debtor/creditor law and employment law.

In general, the board contends the topics targeted for removal are specialized or narrow areas that attorneys either rarely encounter in their practice or consult a specialist when they do.

The two replacement subjects cover areas of law that are commonly used by practitioners, the board explains, and are topics new attorneys will most likely encounter as they begin their careers.

Both the Indianapolis Bar Association and the Indiana State Bar Association argued against deleting the taxation topic. The organizations pointed out that most lawyers will face a tax issue in whatever area of law they practice. Moreover, since many law schools are no longer requiring tax classes, aspiring Indiana attorneys do not have a foundation in this subject and may not be able to spot the tax aspect in a case.

“Keeping tax as a potential subject for the essay portion of the Indiana bar examination is necessary to encourage all law students to take at least one tax course during law school and to develop the necessary basic competency to identify tax issues and analyze legal problems from tax perspectives as well as in practical terms,” the ISBA wrote in its letter to the Board of Law Examiners.

barexam-facts.gifThe points made by the IBA and the ISBA about tax questions underscore the role the bar exam plays in the legal community. The test is not a mere formality, but rather it is an important educational tool.

Law school focuses on teaching students to think like lawyers, said TaKeena Thompson, president of the Marion County Bar Association. Studying for the bar exam shifts the concentration to the nuts and bolts of practice, learning the rules and how to apply them.

“I think overall the bar exam prepared me for practice,” Thompson said. “I think it is definitely valuable. You’re not going to remember everything, but it gives you a good foundation.”

The MCBA surveyed its members about the proposed changes to the

exam. Thompson maintains practicing attorneys should be interested in the bar exam because it is a gateway for the next generation of lawyers. As the current crop of new attorneys ascends in their careers, established attorneys need to make sure those following them have a basic understanding of the law.

Although a small number of MCBA members responded to the survey, the majority approved of the changes. They echoed the board in pointing out that tax law issues do not arise often while debtor/creditor and employment law are areas new associates most commonly practice.

National law

In addition to swapping topics in the Indiana Essay Examination, the board has suggested mixing six topics into the IEE from the Multistate Bar Exam. The proposed new subjects from which essay questions could be produced are federal constitutional law, contracts, criminal law and procedure, evidence, real property, and torts.

These topics will generate more essays that address multiple subjects, the board stated. For example, a pleading and practice question could also include torts and evidence. Expanding the possibilities to include multistate topics will also enable the board to test for minimum competence more effectively.

Stephanie Williams, a clerk for U.S. Magistrate Judge Mark Dinsmore, would like to see multistate subjects in the Indiana portion of the bar exam. A member of the Marion County Bar Association, Williams passed the bar exam in February 2013 after successfully taking the Illinois exam in February 2012.

Having the broader topics could boost the passage rate, Williams said, because test-takers could get points for answering the question in general terms, and then get additional points for adding the distinctions present in Indiana law.

From 2002 to 2012, Indiana had an average bar exam passage rate of 72 percent, according to data from the Indiana Board of Law Examiners.

The Indianapolis Bar Association, however, cautioned against the inclusion of multistate topics because it could impede new lawyers from mastering Indiana law. Multistate topics test Hoosier applicants on areas they likely will not use and lack the unique aspects of the state’s property, criminal, contract and tort laws.

“If today Indiana were deciding for the first time what its Bar Examination should cover and what its purpose is, reasonable minds could conclude that the prior Indiana model of a fully Indiana-administered Indiana-focused Exam is in the State’s, the Bar’s and the judiciary’s best interests,” the IBA wrote in its letter.

Whether the board presents the Indiana Supreme Court with any recommendations for changes is uncertain, Laramore said. Currently, the members are turning their attention to the July bar exam and the subsequent grading. Afterward, they will return to their proposed changes.

Any changes that are approved would not take effect until July 2016.•

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

facebook - twitter on Facebook & Twitter

Indiana State Bar Association

Indianapolis Bar Association

Evansville Bar Association

Allen County Bar Association

Indiana Lawyer on Facebook

facebook
ADVERTISEMENT
Subscribe to Indiana Lawyer
  1. I like the concept. Seems like a good idea and really inexpensive to manage.

  2. I don't agree that this is an extreme case. There are more of these people than you realize - people that are vindictive and/or with psychological issues have clogged the system with baseless suits that are costly to the defendant and to taxpayers. Restricting repeat offenders from further abusing the system is not akin to restricting their freedon, but to protecting their victims, and the court system, from allowing them unfettered access. From the Supreme Court opinion "he has burdened the opposing party and the courts of this state at every level with massive, confusing, disorganized, defective, repetitive, and often meritless filings."

  3. So, if you cry wolf one too many times courts may "restrict" your ability to pursue legal action? Also, why is document production equated with wealth? Anyone can "produce probably tens of thousands of pages of filings" if they have a public library card. I understand this is an extreme case, but our Supreme Court really got this one wrong.

  4. He called our nation a nation of cowards because we didn't want to talk about race. That was a cheap shot coming from the top cop. The man who decides who gets the federal government indicts. Wow. Not a gentleman if that is the measure. More importantly, this insult delivered as we all understand, to white people-- without him or anybody needing to explain that is precisely what he meant-- but this is an insult to timid white persons who fear the government and don't want to say anything about race for fear of being accused a racist. With all the legal heat that can come down on somebody if they say something which can be construed by a prosecutor like Mr Holder as racist, is it any wonder white people-- that's who he meant obviously-- is there any surprise that white people don't want to talk about race? And as lawyers we have even less freedom lest our remarks be considered violations of the rules. Mr Holder also demonstrated his bias by publically visiting with the family of the young man who was killed by a police offering in the line of duty, which was a very strong indicator of bias agains the offer who is under investigation, and was a failure to lead properly by letting his investigators do their job without him predetermining the proper outcome. He also has potentially biased the jury pool. All in all this worsens race relations by feeding into the perception shared by whites as well as blacks that justice will not be impartial. I will say this much, I do not blame Obama for all of HOlder's missteps. Obama has done a lot of things to stay above the fray and try and be a leader for all Americans. Maybe he should have reigned Holder in some but Obama's got his hands full with other problelms. Oh did I mention HOlder is a bank crony who will probably get a job in a silkstocking law firm working for millions of bucks a year defending bankers whom he didn't have the integrity or courage to hold to account for their acts of fraud on the United States, other financial institutions, and the people. His tenure will be regarded by history as a failure of leadership at one of the most important jobs in our nation. Finally and most importantly besides him insulting the public and letting off the big financial cheats, he has been at the forefront of over-prosecuting the secrecy laws to punish whistleblowers and chill free speech. What has Holder done to vindicate the rights of privacy of the American public against the illegal snooping of the NSA? He could have charged NSA personnel with violations of law for their warrantless wiretapping which has been done millions of times and instead he did not persecute a single soul. That is a defalcation of historical proportions and it signals to the public that the government DOJ under him was not willing to do a damn thing to protect the public against the rapid growth of the illegal surveillance state. Who else could have done this? Nobody. And for that omission Obama deserves the blame too. Here were are sliding into a police state and Eric Holder made it go all the faster.

  5. JOE CLAYPOOL candidate for Superior Court in Harrison County - Indiana This candidate is misleading voters to think he is a Judge by putting Elect Judge Joe Claypool on his campaign literature. paragraphs 2 and 9 below clearly indicate this injustice to voting public to gain employment. What can we do? Indiana Code - Section 35-43-5-3: Deception (a) A person who: (1) being an officer, manager, or other person participating in the direction of a credit institution, knowingly or intentionally receives or permits the receipt of a deposit or other investment, knowing that the institution is insolvent; (2) knowingly or intentionally makes a false or misleading written statement with intent to obtain property, employment, or an educational opportunity; (3) misapplies entrusted property, property of a governmental entity, or property of a credit institution in a manner that the person knows is unlawful or that the person knows involves substantial risk of loss or detriment to either the owner of the property or to a person for whose benefit the property was entrusted; (4) knowingly or intentionally, in the regular course of business, either: (A) uses or possesses for use a false weight or measure or other device for falsely determining or recording the quality or quantity of any commodity; or (B) sells, offers, or displays for sale or delivers less than the represented quality or quantity of any commodity; (5) with intent to defraud another person furnishing electricity, gas, water, telecommunication, or any other utility service, avoids a lawful charge for that service by scheme or device or by tampering with facilities or equipment of the person furnishing the service; (6) with intent to defraud, misrepresents the identity of the person or another person or the identity or quality of property; (7) with intent to defraud an owner of a coin machine, deposits a slug in that machine; (8) with intent to enable the person or another person to deposit a slug in a coin machine, makes, possesses, or disposes of a slug; (9) disseminates to the public an advertisement that the person knows is false, misleading, or deceptive, with intent to promote the purchase or sale of property or the acceptance of employment;

ADVERTISEMENT