I've heard various people say that their own state's bar exam is the most difficult. The states that come to mind when I think of a challenging bar exam are: New York, Pennsylvania and Cali. What makes one bar exam more difficult than another?
How easy would it be for someone who has gone to law school outside of Louisiana and practiced only outside of Louisiana to pass the Louisiana Bar?

I've taken the California, Arizona and Hawaii bar exams. They differ in several respects. They all include the Multistate Bar Exam, except Californial makes it optional for applicants licensed in other jurisdictions. I believe that Washington and Louisana do not utilize the MBE.

The California exam includes a Performance Test in the afternoons of the two days of essay testing. The Performance Test is a written essay based upon a task, usually writing a brief, using information and materials provided. The materials may include transcript testimony, statutes, correspondence, etc.

The California and Hawaii essays do not require knowledge of Calif. or Hawaii Civil or Criminal law, it is general principle law that is tested. The exception to that will be the testing on Community Property principles. Arizona DOES test on AZ law, including their own flavors of procedure, community property, real estate, etc.

If you're intersted in admission without testing . . . Texas is one of those "lodestone" states . . . you can buy your way in with the proper credentials and then reciprocity with other states gets you into many other state bars.

Louisiana is a unique jurisdiction. It has the longest bar exam in the country, 3 days without the MBE. Because of their unique civil code, it does test exclusively on the state law.

The California one is really, really tough.

Here was an actual California bar examination question (as best I can remember):


"Two vehicles are approaching an intersection. There has been a terrible storm going on, and the power was interrupted such that the signal light at the intersection now was displaying a green light from BOTH directions. The city had been notified of this, three hours previously, but had done nothing to fix the problem since that time. The first driver (#A) was speeding, and the other driver (#B) was not speeding, but was driving in violation of an ordinance which stated that you shall not operate a motor vehicle while under the influence of Alcohol.

BOOM!!!! (Crash!!). Discuss."


If THAT didn't sink you, the "Rule Against Perpetuities" certainly might...

__________________
1991 560 SEC AMG, 199k <---- 300 hp 10:1 ECE euro HV ...

1995 E 420, 170k "The Red Plum" (sold)

2015 BMW 535i xdrive awd Stage 1 DINAN, 6k, <----364 hp

1967 Mercury Cougar, 49k

2013 Jaguar XF, 20k <----340 hp Supercharged, All Wheel Drive (sold)

I took Missouri and Kansas in 04 and 05 respectively. Kansas seemed easier but I took it without the multistate component. Missouri was fairly challenging. New York has a rep for being tough, and so does W. VA, if only because from what I hear its three days and you have to wear a full suit when you take it. Not sure if thats true, though.

__________________
1984 300D turbo, 250K
1971 MGBGT, 101K
2007 VW Jetta, 4K

I don't believe that the "I got here first!" rule applies, so therefore, I believe that the vehicle, on the left at the intersection, should have yielded the right of way...regardless of the lights' condition(s) - since BOTH directions were showing something that was not possible (green) and both drivers should have been exercising due caution (due to the weather conditions as stated)...the intersection should then be treated as if it were a 4-Way Stop.

If we were to assign blame in the crash, the scale is tipped to the favor of the vehicle that hit by the non-yielding vehicle.

As to the other details...I'd apply a little "Saul" logic and;

#1.) Have a DA, from another county, investigate and prosecute the public entity that should have been correcting the "light situation" to begin with...then, as a judge from that accident's district, recuse oneself and assign the case to another judge from a different district...

#2.) Take driver one and fine him for speeding and causing an accident - penalties to take into account the severities of the damages/injuries;

#3.) Take driver two and fine him for OUI and causing an accident - likewise, penalties to take into account the severities of the damages/injuries...

Do I win a "sheepskin?"

__________________

M. G. Burg
'10 - Dakota SXT - Daily Ride / ≈ 172.5K
.'76 - 450SLC - 107.024.12 / < .89.20 K
..'77 - 280E - 123.033.12 / > 128.20 K
...'67 - El Camino - 283ci / > 207.00 K
....'75 - Yamaha - 650XS / < 21.00 K
.....'87 - G20 Sportvan / > 206.00 K
......'85 - 4WINNS 160 I.O. / 140hp
.......'74 - Honda CT70 / Real 125
.
“I didn’t really say everything I said.”
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ~ Yogi Berra ~

No! You failed miserably.

1. It is very difficult to successfully sue a municipality and collect a judgment. Therefore, suit must be filed by both drivers against General Electric (the maker of the light bulbs in the signal) which has lots of money.

2. The car involved was patently dangerous since it was capable of exceeding the speed limit. Suit must be brought against the manufacturer of the car, the maker of the tires and any facility where maintenance was performed.

3. Coors-Molson obviously knew that their product could be consumed by someone who might drive. The beer can did not have a warning not to drive in storms printed on it. Don't forget to include the beer distributor as a defendant.

__________________
1983 300SD "Guderian"
1987 MR2
2015 Camry
2015 Chevy Spark
2006 Hyundai Tucson

Don't forget to sue the parents for birthing a speeder and drinker. Bad people....

__________________
MB-less

Alamostation & Emmerich:

Remember, I prefaced my response with "Saul" logic...oh...yah, that's right...don't punish the guilty, punish everyone else with the deeper pockets.

DUH! How could I have been so BASE?!?!?!?!?

It seems that our system of Justice is there only to perpetuate its own self-interests, and not those of its clients...

That reminds me of a cartoon a saw in a magazine, quite a few years ago...

It showed a "John Houston" style of character in the lecture pit at a university, and on the blackboard behind the professor, was the phrase "LAW 101"
--- and the caption under that one little drawing said;

"The number one rule is this: It's not about whether you win...or lose. It's about the fact that you will ALWAYS get paid."

__________________

M. G. Burg
'10 - Dakota SXT - Daily Ride / ≈ 172.5K
.'76 - 450SLC - 107.024.12 / < .89.20 K
..'77 - 280E - 123.033.12 / > 128.20 K
...'67 - El Camino - 283ci / > 207.00 K
....'75 - Yamaha - 650XS / < 21.00 K
.....'87 - G20 Sportvan / > 206.00 K
......'85 - 4WINNS 160 I.O. / 140hp
.......'74 - Honda CT70 / Real 125
.
“I didn’t really say everything I said.”
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ~ Yogi Berra ~

Hey I like that. Saul logic.

__________________
You don't need a weatherman to know which way the wind blows - Robert A. Zimmerman

MTI wrote: The California and Hawaii essays do not require knowledge of Calif. or Hawaii Civil or Criminal law, it is general principle law that is tested.The exception to that will be the testing on Community Property principles

MTI: Sorry, that is not correct anymore in California. I should know, since I just took the exam last year. You can look it up on the Cal Bar website, but Cal (starting last year in May), in their essays are now requiring Cal specific knowledge of civil procedure and evidence. (The differences are many, and minor, making it extremely difficult in my opinion to prepare for).

As far as difficulty, it is really hard to say since I have not taken any other bar.

Alot people base bar difficulty on pass rate, but there are flaws in that presumption.

__________________
'98 SL600 Black/Black
2002 E320 White
'76 450SEL Sold, too thirsty
'85 300TD Sold, shouldn't have
Maybe a 280SL someday

will have to resurrect when JD comes back...

__________________
"It's normal for these things to empty your wallet and break your heart in the process."
2012 SLK 350
1987 420 SEL

I was not aware that Calif recently (revised July 2007) changed their scope of the essay exam questions. I agree that it will now make it tougher, reinforcing the concept that the California bar is one of "exclusion."

As for "pass rate" . . . it should be noted that the so-called pass rate for lawyers, licensed in other jurisdictions, taking the CA bar exam is abysmal.

It does make sense though, I think all states should emphasize their jurisdictions laws and procedure, otherewise, there should either be reciprocity or just completion of the MBE/MPRE.

MTI- are you a judge?

__________________
"It's normal for these things to empty your wallet and break your heart in the process."
2012 SLK 350
1987 420 SEL

MTI-

I agree there are some exclusion concerns in the bar.

I also agree there is a alot of "since your state does not recognize my state bar" going on regarding reciprocity.

Can you imagine releasing Cal lawyers from our borders to rampage the countryside?

Of course, I am not in favor of it, but I could envision the day where the Federal Laws are so all encompassing and duplicative of state laws that we should just get rid out state laws. The Feds wouldn't mind a little more power would they? The United State of America? (Haven't the done that with abortion already?)

Yes, I know there's that little problem of the Constitution regarding federal police power, but as you know there's always the Commerce Clause.

__________________
'98 SL600 Black/Black
2002 E320 White
'76 450SEL Sold, too thirsty
'85 300TD Sold, shouldn't have
Maybe a 280SL someday

Sorry about the typos, I got excited there.

__________________
'98 SL600 Black/Black
2002 E320 White
'76 450SEL Sold, too thirsty
'85 300TD Sold, shouldn't have
Maybe a 280SL someday