July 2016 California Bar Exam Forum

[Boltsfan]

Nope. Got an email from my school asking us to self-report because they aren't releasing the data to them.

EDIT: Sorry, I misunderstood what you're saying. They very well might be publishing pass rates. It's weird my school would ask us in that case.

Also, does anyone know if school pass rates published by the bar include LLMs?

My school did this too. I think they (1) don't want to wait for the bar to tell them and (2) want more detailed information than the bar is going to give. If they have names, for example, then they can tell where in the class the passers and non-passers are in or what demographic data is common to passers and non-passers. Stuff like that might help them tailor their approach going forward.

[rcharter1978]

Think of all the type a attorney types you know.....

Do you know anyone who brags about their MPRE score? Why would you assume the bar exam would be any different. Its a test of minimum competency. It tests stuff like criminal common law despite the fact that all jurisdictions have penal codes now. It is in no way relevant to practice other than you have to have passed it to get your card.

I had a friend who took the UBE and scored over 300, so well over what you would need to get into any UBE jurisdiction, and we both agree she screwed up by not having more fun last summer. I just don't think anyone would really care. I think Texas actually publishes the name of the person who got the high score on the exam. That would be an interesting case study I guess.

Yes, people on this site were bragging/talking about their mpre score. So yeah, you and your friend notwithstanding people do brag/care about scores, even for a minimal competency test.

[Yukos]

Think of all the type a attorney types you know.....

Do you know anyone who brags about their MPRE score? Why would you assume the bar exam would be any different. Its a test of minimum competency. It tests stuff like criminal common law despite the fact that all jurisdictions have penal codes now. It is in no way relevant to practice other than you have to have passed it to get your card.

I had a friend who took the UBE and scored over 300, so well over what you would need to get into any UBE jurisdiction, and we both agree she screwed up by not having more fun last summer. I just don't think anyone would really care. I think Texas actually publishes the name of the person who got the high score on the exam. That would be an interesting case study I guess.

Yes, people on this site were bragging/talking about their mpre score. So yeah, you and your friend notwithstanding people do brag/care about scores, even for a minimal competency test.

If that is true that is really pathetic.

[a male human]

Anyone have a link to the public name search of bar pass?
In the past the public could always search by name starting on Sunday.
I don't have the heart to ask a buddy if he passed...

No public pass list anymore, at least I don't think so.

Thanks. Apparently so.

Wow. 43% pass rate?
Is the test harder? What happened here?

Feels like the Cal Bar is trying to send a message to law schools that graduate folks without the ability to pass.
I wonder if the schools will just change the curriculum to a 3-year long bar-bri program?

I, for one, think it's outrageous that the bar isn't releasing the pass list to the public and/or law schools. How are schools supposed to publish their' bar passage rates now? This seems like a huge step backwards in consumer protection to me.

I thought they still released the pass rates for the schools just not individuals.

Nope. Got an email from my school asking us to self-report because they aren't releasing the data to them.

EDIT: Sorry, I misunderstood what you're saying. They very well might be publishing pass rates. It's weird my school would ask us in that case.

Also, does anyone know if school pass rates published by the bar include LLMs?

I believe LLM stats are separately marketed to prospective LLM students.

[Boltsfan]

Yes, people on this site were bragging/talking about their mpre score. So yeah, you and your friend notwithstanding people do brag/care about scores, even for a minimal competency test.

Ok, that's fair, but people on this site appear to be mostly either baby attorneys or non-attorneys/law students. Also, they are posting in a (relatively) anonymous fashion on the internet, on a forum called "Top Law Schools" that is mostly about dick measuring. Have you ever heard two attorneys (not fresh out of law school) talking about their MPRE score? Have you ever seen an MPRE score on a resume? Has anyone ever asked you your MPRE score in an interview? California bar exam score would not be a metric anyone (who matters) would care about. I think this is especially likely based on the many jurisdictions that do tell passers their scores.

[a male human]

Anyone have a link to the public name search of bar pass?
In the past the public could always search by name starting on Sunday.
I don't have the heart to ask a buddy if he passed...

No public pass list anymore, at least I don't think so.

Thanks. Apparently so.

Wow. 43% pass rate?
Is the test harder? What happened here?

Feels like the Cal Bar is trying to send a message to law schools that graduate folks without the ability to pass.
I wonder if the schools will just change the curriculum to a 3-year long bar-bri program?

Yep, some of the lower-ranked schools have a bar-focused curriculum. They will see essays and MBE questions throughout law school.

[rcharter1978]

Yes, people on this site were bragging/talking about their mpre score. So yeah, you and your friend notwithstanding people do brag/care about scores, even for a minimal competency test.

Ok, that's fair, but people on this site appear to be mostly either baby attorneys or non-attorneys/law students. Also, they are posting in a (relatively) anonymous fashion on the internet, on a forum called "Top Law Schools" that is mostly about dick measuring. Have you ever heard two attorneys (not fresh out of law school) talking about their MPRE score? Have you ever seen an MPRE score on a resume? Has anyone ever asked you your MPRE score in an interview? California bar exam score would not be a metric anyone (who matters) would care about. I think this is especially likely based on the many jurisdictions that do tell passers their scores.

But these are the same type a law students that rise to senior partner. They care about numbers as a sign is prestige.

I think a test that is ostensibly about how smart you are (I don't think the MPRE counts) could easily become a metric that employers ask for in order to determine if you're good enough for their firm.

Type a personalities always want to measure dicks.

[Boltsfan]

But these are the same type a law students that rise to senior partner. They care about numbers as a sign is prestige.

I think a test that is ostensibly about how smart you are (I don't think the MPRE counts) could easily become a metric that employers ask for in order to determine if you're good enough for their firm.

Type a personalities always want to measure dicks.

You're operating on a few faulty premises here. First, the bar exam is not ostensibly about how smart you are. The bar exam is a test to determine whether you are minimally competent to practice law. Whether or not it is a good test to determine that aside, if you pass (no matter how close you came to failing), you are allowed into the club. If you fail (no matter how close you came to passing), you are not allowed in.

Second, the only numbers senior partners care about are (1) how many hours did he bill and (2) how much business did he generate. If you are referring to hiring at the entry level, those senior partners aren't going to suddenly introduce a new metric. They're still going to hire based on brand name of the school, gpa, law review, and fit.

Third, while I am less certain about this one, I would argue that the kind of posters who brag about their MPRE score are not the type of people that are going to become senior partners. They are the kind of people who no one will like and who will be steered in house ASAP.

[rcharter1978]

But these are the same type a law students that rise to senior partner. They care about numbers as a sign is prestige.

I think a test that is ostensibly about how smart you are (I don't think the MPRE counts) could easily become a metric that employers ask for in order to determine if you're good enough for their firm.

Type a personalities always want to measure dicks.

You're operating on a few faulty premises here. First, the bar exam is not ostensibly about how smart you are. The bar exam is a test to determine whether you are minimally competent to practice law. Whether or not it is a good test to determine that aside, if you pass (no matter how close you came to failing), you are allowed into the club. If you fail (no matter how close you came to passing), you are not allowed in.

Second, the only numbers senior partners care about are (1) how many hours did he bill and (2) how much business did he generate. If you are referring to hiring at the entry level, those senior partners aren't going to suddenly introduce a new metric. They're still going to hire based on brand name of the school, gpa, law review, and fit.

Third, while I am less certain about this one, I would argue that the kind of posters who brag about their MPRE score are not the type of people that are going to become senior partners. They are the kind of people who no one will like and who will be steered in house ASAP.

I think there are more type a people in big law than that. They are the sort to sacrifice a life in order to have power and prestige. The sort for whom prestige matters.

People here want to know if they "crushed" the exam so clearly it's not just seen as a test of minimal competence and it means something more than that.

The bar exam can be easily perceived as a test of intelligence or of legal knowledge.

Neither you or I KNOW what metric would be introduced but I would have no trouble envisioning introducing a new competitive metric to brag about and determine who is the best.

E: however the fact that hiring partners don't ask for bar exam scores in ube states bolsters your arguments so who knows.

[plurilingue]

I always thought that the reason why they don't give grades to passing examinees is because their essays and performance tests are not scrutinized as heavily. We know that the MBE is graded within the first month after the exam, since the average national MBE score is calculated during that period and published. My sense was that candidates are grouped based on where they fall in an MBE band and graders of candidates with very high scores get through those essays more quickly since (1) they are very likely to be passing, based on the correlation between a good MBE score and good essays; and (2) the essay grades are less likely to be outcome determinative.

[2TimesTheCharm]

But these are the same type a law students that rise to senior partner. They care about numbers as a sign is prestige.

I think a test that is ostensibly about how smart you are (I don't think the MPRE counts) could easily become a metric that employers ask for in order to determine if you're good enough for their firm.

Type a personalities always want to measure dicks.

You're operating on a few faulty premises here. First, the bar exam is not ostensibly about how smart you are. The bar exam is a test to determine whether you are minimally competent to practice law. Whether or not it is a good test to determine that aside, if you pass (no matter how close you came to failing), you are allowed into the club. If you fail (no matter how close you came to passing), you are not allowed in.

Second, the only numbers senior partners care about are (1) how many hours did he bill and (2) how much business did he generate. If you are referring to hiring at the entry level, those senior partners aren't going to suddenly introduce a new metric. They're still going to hire based on brand name of the school, gpa, law review, and fit.

Third, while I am less certain about this one, I would argue that the kind of posters who brag about their MPRE score are not the type of people that are going to become senior partners. They are the kind of people who no one will like and who will be steered in house ASAP.

I think there are more type a people in big law than that. They are the sort to sacrifice a life in order to have power and prestige. The sort for whom prestige matters.

People here want to know if they "crushed" the exam so clearly it's not just seen as a test of minimal competence and it means something more than that.

The bar exam can be easily perceived as a test of intelligence or of legal knowledge.

Neither you or I KNOW what metric would be introduced but I would have no trouble envisioning introducing a new competitive metric to brag about and determine who is the best.

E: however the fact that hiring partners don't ask for bar exam scores in ube states bolsters your arguments so who knows.

Speaking from personal experience only, Bolts' right about the numbers. I don't think anyone's ever been asked about their MPRE score during an interview for either our firm or at my law school. For entry level, it's place of origin, grades and honors, work experience, name of school and fit. For laterals, it's experience and fit. But I will remember to at anyone who brings it up during next year's interviews.

[rcharter1978]

^^I don't think the MPRE is comparable to the bar exam. As much as grades and class rank are a measure of your intelligence/legal ability, it would be the same as your score on the bar exam. Or it can be perceived as such. I don't think the MPRE is seen the same way.

[2TimesTheCharm]

^^I don't think the MPRE is comparable to the bar exam. As much as grades and class rank are a measure of your intelligence/legal ability, it would be the same as your score on the bar exam. Or it can be perceived as such. I don't think the MPRE is seen the same way.

I think what I said applies to bar exams as well, at least on a practical level. The only time our firm has ever asked an applicant about their bar status was laterals and to ensure they already passed the CA bar. ("Are you barred in CA?" "Yes." "Great, thank you.") For entry-level folks, we don't care unless they fail a second time. The partners themselves were never selected based on stellar bar-exam scores, so they won't give it the same weight as grades or school name.

For what it's worth, I went to a nice school and some of our brightest managed to fail the NY/CA bar their first time. It has no bearing on my (or most other folks') respect for them. For the ones that were clerking at the time, their biggest grievance was having to pay for another bar exam.

[LurkerTurnedMember]

^^I don't think the MPRE is comparable to the bar exam. As much as grades and class rank are a measure of your intelligence/legal ability, it would be the same as your score on the bar exam. Or it can be perceived as such. I don't think the MPRE is seen the same way.

I think what I said applies to bar exams as well, at least on a practical level. The only time our firm has ever asked an applicant about their bar status was laterals and to ensure they already passed the CA bar. ("Are you barred in CA?" "Yes." "Great, thank you.") For entry-level folks, we don't care unless they fail a second time. The partners themselves were never selected based on stellar bar-exam scores, so they won't give it the same weight as grades or school name.

For what it's worth, I went to a nice school and some of our brightest managed to fail the NY/CA bar their first time. It has no bearing on my (or most other folks') respect for them. For the ones that were clerking at the time, their biggest grievance was having to pay for another bar exam.

As much as I can't stand the dumb measures we use to differentiate ourselves in this dick-measuring contest we call the legal profession (see posts above), I would 100% ask applicants of my firm how they scored on the bar exam. I wouldn't be surprised if some ebola backwash like US News came up with ranks for students, like Order of the Quif for top 10% so that you can put it on your resume for me. I might not like it, but my firm as hell would like putting on its website something along the lines of, "X percent of incoming lawyers are the top graduating lawyers in this state, having scored X on the [enter state] bar exam. [If california, then mention how it's the hardest in the country]." The bar exam is literally what is "said" to determine whether you're competent to practice law. It's what your law school studying finishes off with. It's the ultimate test. It's not the MPRE by any measure. So if those scores become public for passers, you upcoming lawyers better get them ready for me.

[2TimesTheCharm]

As much as I can't stand the dumb measures we use to differentiate ourselves in this dick-measuring contest we call the legal profession (see posts above), I would 100% ask applicants of my firm how they scored on the bar exam. I wouldn't be surprised if some ebola backwash like US News came up with ranks for students, like Order of the Quif for top 10% so that you can put it on your resume for me. I might not like it, but my firm as hell would like putting on its website something along the lines of, "X percent of incoming lawyers are the top graduating lawyers in this state, having scored X on the [enter state] bar exam. [If california, then mention how it's the hardest in the country]." The bar exam is literally what is "said" to determine whether you're competent to practice law. It's what your law school studying finishes off with. It's the ultimate test. It's not the MPRE by any measure. So if those scores become public for passers, you upcoming lawyers better get them ready for me.

Haha, fair enough -- any chance you're at SullCrom or Skadden? I know they're a little prestige sensitive, are least more than we are. We're not a V5 firm (V20, to be honest), and occasionally, we hire students without honors from certain schools, though the schools themselves are nice enough that we're sure people will do well.

In other words, if the scores ever become public, those who barely passed shouldn't worry; they can still get a home with us.

[Notorious RBG]

I know this is a bit of a petty grievance, but I really do think successful bar takers should be able to see the breakdowns of their scores. We paid hundreds of dollars to take the test, it's not like the state bar is performing a free service; is it just laziness/bad value that they do not produce itemized score reports for everyone, or is there some extraneous justification?

No way, lawyers have enough barely relevant criteria on which to neurotically judge each other and ourselves. Imagine a world where law firm hiring were based on not just your law school, class rank, and whether you passed the bar right away, but also your actual score on the bar? Eff that noise. Most people who fail barely fail, and most who pass barely pass. And a lot of it is subjective and imperfect anyway. Assume you got a 1410 and move on.

Okay, these are some pretty compelling arguments. I can see why we wouldn't want to transform scaled bar scores into another dick measuring contest. That being said, I think the horizontal inequity concern raised by Lurker actually runs the other way: a greater divergence between black and latino students and caucasian students, if it exists and if public data could prove it, would motivate positive changes to the test itself and the california bar administration.

For me, part of the personal frustration is that I will be taking the new york bar in a little over a year, and it would be nice to know whether my MBE scores were strong enough that I can spend less time drilling them and focus on the NY specific law/UBE, or whether my performance tests saved me from a shitty MBE result and I need to focus on MBE since I have less essay cushion in Ny. But oh well; again, a petty grievance.

You have a good point. And apologies if I sounded a bit like I was ranting. I'm at a top law school, top 10%, law review, good federal clerkship, and a biglaw job and I'm exhausted with having to worry about these almost random, immaterial measures of "merit." I can tell you there are soo many law students and newly minted lawyers who are much smarter and more capable than me and yet had trouble landing a big law job or a clerkship or do what they wanted to do with their career only because these measures we picked to rank ourselves aren't good measures in the first place. (I'm not saying I'm stupid or incapable, just that there are others better). And the cycle seems to feed on itself. I meet so many clerks and biglaw lawyers and judges who hire and value based on these dumb measures (I was surprised by how many judges wanted us to put our LSAT score on the resume for clerkship apps). It's like that kid in high school who had a cool honda civic and still brings it around the high school parking lot to show off even though he graduated 2 years ago. Give it a rest and grow up, no one cares about your lsat score, you class rank, your school. Just be a good lawyer.

I've had a similar experience as you, as far as seeing some brilliant people get held back by these relatively arbitrary measures (and the opposite, people with pristine credentials but off-putting personalities get rewarded, at least early in their career). Usually though, if you work hard and are great at your job and clients like you, you can still rise to the top without the T14 and top 10% stuff. It's just an uphill battle. It's a big part of why the structure of the legal profession is so outdated, and out-of-line with how business is done generally (i.e. your clients!).

[bananasplit19]

Quick sidebar: I was lucky enough to get good news on Friday in re the exam, but my fucking moral character app is still in processing purgatory. I submitted back in March, but they came back to me in July with a request for new fingerprint cards. I guess that reset my 180-day clock, and when I called my analyst today, he said there's no way I'm going to get sworn in any time soon because I'm not close to the 180 day mark.

Does anyone have advice or experience with getting them to expedite at all? I also have heard whispers that if you poke them too much, your 180-day clock might mysteriously reset back to zero. But neither I nor my firm have no desire to wait until the Spring for me to get sworn in.

[poundcr]

Quick sidebar: I was lucky enough to get good news on Friday in re the exam, but my fucking moral character app is still in processing purgatory. I submitted back in March, but they came back to me in July with a request for new fingerprint cards. I guess that reset my 180-day clock, and when I called my analyst today, he said there's no way I'm going to get sworn in any time soon because I'm not close to the 180 day mark.

Does anyone have advice or experience with getting them to expedite at all? I also have heard whispers that if you poke them too much, your 180-day clock might mysteriously reset back to zero. But neither I nor my firm have no desire to wait until the Spring for me to get sworn in.

No advice but just here to commiserate on waiting on Moral Character. Basically my Dean gave information they absolutely did not need to, left out info that would show she did not need to (and this made me look like I was trying to not disclose something I should have). I know I will eventually be fine but I find out next week if I will need to speak the the committee or not. I am trying to be calm but if I have to talk to them in would be January at the earliest which might really screw me for the jobs I am interviewing with in the coming weeks. Good luck! My analyst has been really helpful and good about getting back to me, i just make sure to be really to the point and not whiny. I know they were really working hard to push those who were close through before the exam results. Hopefully now they will get back to doing the initial review for people like you!

[Boltsfan]

As much as I can't stand the dumb measures we use to differentiate ourselves in this dick-measuring contest we call the legal profession (see posts above), I would 100% ask applicants of my firm how they scored on the bar exam. I wouldn't be surprised if some ebola backwash like US News came up with ranks for students, like Order of the Quif for top 10% so that you can put it on your resume for me. I might not like it, but my firm as hell would like putting on its website something along the lines of, "X percent of incoming lawyers are the top graduating lawyers in this state, having scored X on the [enter state] bar exam. [If california, then mention how it's the hardest in the country]." The bar exam is literally what is "said" to determine whether you're competent to practice law. It's what your law school studying finishes off with. It's the ultimate test. It's not the MPRE by any measure. So if those scores become public for passers, you upcoming lawyers better get them ready for me.

Yo, the goal of the bar exam is to pass the bar exam. The goal is not to set the high score. There are times when you want to set the high score, such as when you are taking law school exams. Setting the high score on the bar exam is a sign that you have done a poor job of assessing the amount of time to allocate to bar study. Because the stakes are so high, it makes sense to overestimate this number by some amount. But if you score something like 1600+ on the California bar exam you have not demonstrated superior intelligence; you have demonstrated that you don't know when to stop.

The bar exam is not the "ultimate test;" no one whose opinion matters treats the bar exam as the "ultimate test." It is a test of minimum competency. The graders spend something like 5 minutes per essay on average because they aren't sorting for "the best," they're sorting for competent and incompetent. No one puts their UBE score on their resume. No one asks what your UBE score is (other than perhaps to verify that you are eligible for admission in the jurisdiction). Keep in mind that NY is a UBE jurisdiction now; the most prestige-conscious firms are not asking for this because doing well on a test of minimum competency is not prestigious. Doing well on a test of minimum competency only means you are minimally competent to practice law.

Everyone who has graduated from law school has already had plenty of opportunities to stand out from their peers. Bar exam score is not going to become one of those because no one cares how you did as long as you passed.

I always thought that the reason why they don't give grades to passing examinees is because their essays and performance tests are not scrutinized as heavily. We know that the MBE is graded within the first month after the exam, since the average national MBE score is calculated during that period and published. My sense was that candidates are grouped based on where they fall in an MBE band and graders of candidates with very high scores get through those essays more quickly since (1) they are very likely to be passing, based on the correlation between a good MBE score and good essays; and (2) the essay grades are less likely to be outcome determinative.

This could certainly be the reason. I always assumed it was because there is so much variation in essay grading that they don't want to let you in on it unless they absolutely have to.

[drawingasmile]

Off topic, but I was wondering about score results for those of us who failed the July 2016 Bar. I know we get our Essays and PT results back, but do we also get a breakdown of the MBE scores? Or would we have to request that from NCBE? Thanks!

[a male human]

Off topic, but I was wondering about score results for those of us who failed the July 2016 Bar. I know we get our Essays and PT results back, but do we also get a breakdown of the MBE scores? Or would we have to request that from NCBE? Thanks!

Use this to estimate. Your exact score will remain a mystery.

MBE scaling table from the past (latest available one AFAIK) http://admissions.calbar.ca.gov/portals ... l_info.pdf

[iliketurtles123]

As much as I can't stand the dumb measures we use to differentiate ourselves in this dick-measuring contest we call the legal profession (see posts above), I would 100% ask applicants of my firm how they scored on the bar exam. I wouldn't be surprised if some ebola backwash like US News came up with ranks for students, like Order of the Quif for top 10% so that you can put it on your resume for me. I might not like it, but my firm as hell would like putting on its website something along the lines of, "X percent of incoming lawyers are the top graduating lawyers in this state, having scored X on the [enter state] bar exam. [If california, then mention how it's the hardest in the country]." The bar exam is literally what is "said" to determine whether you're competent to practice law. It's what your law school studying finishes off with. It's the ultimate test. It's not the MPRE by any measure. So if those scores become public for passers, you upcoming lawyers better get them ready for me.

Yo, the goal of the bar exam is to pass the bar exam. The goal is not to set the high score. There are times when you want to set the high score, such as when you are taking law school exams. Setting the high score on the bar exam is a sign that you have done a poor job of assessing the amount of time to allocate to bar study. Because the stakes are so high, it makes sense to overestimate this number by some amount. But if you score something like 1600+ on the California bar exam you have not demonstrated superior intelligence; you have demonstrated that you don't know when to stop.

The bar exam is not the "ultimate test;" no one whose opinion matters treats the bar exam as the "ultimate test." It is a test of minimum competency. The graders spend something like 5 minutes per essay on average because they aren't sorting for "the best," they're sorting for competent and incompetent. No one puts their UBE score on their resume. No one asks what your UBE score is (other than perhaps to verify that you are eligible for admission in the jurisdiction). Keep in mind that NY is a UBE jurisdiction now; the most prestige-conscious firms are not asking for this because doing well on a test of minimum competency is not prestigious. Doing well on a test of minimum competency only means you are minimally competent to practice law.

Everyone who has graduated from law school has already had plenty of opportunities to stand out from their peers. Bar exam score is not going to become one of those because no one cares how you did as long as you passed.

I always thought that the reason why they don't give grades to passing examinees is because their essays and performance tests are not scrutinized as heavily. We know that the MBE is graded within the first month after the exam, since the average national MBE score is calculated during that period and published. My sense was that candidates are grouped based on where they fall in an MBE band and graders of candidates with very high scores get through those essays more quickly since (1) they are very likely to be passing, based on the correlation between a good MBE score and good essays; and (2) the essay grades are less likely to be outcome determinative.

This could certainly be the reason. I always assumed it was because there is so much variation in essay grading that they don't want to let you in on it unless they absolutely have to.

You're confusing what the bar exam is versus what it potentially can be (if scores are public).
Also, seems like many people in this thread are confusing what the bar exam SHOULD be v. what the legal industry would make it to be.

Yes, we all agree that the bar exam is a shit test that measures nothing and scores should not be used to judge a candidate. There's no argument there (at least in this thread so far). But that's not going to stop legal practitioners from using it as a way of measuring your capabilities if scores are made public (not saying they will but it's a possibility and perhaps that's why scores are not made public).

The metrics currently used in hiring right now are just as shitty and just as controversial. Again, not saying it's a guarantee that employers will ask your bar score. However, it's not completely far-fetched either, no matter how illogical you think it is, given the current methods used by the legal profession. Lawyers/law schools will do grab onto whatever numbers they can in making hiring choices, whether it's the LSAT, school rank, GPA/class rank, or potentially, the bar exam. (The MPRE is different because it's such a narrow subject that no one really gives a shit about and most likely doesn't really pertain to your practice, and a passing score is enough to make sure you aren't going to be noncompliant in that area).

Right now a passing score is sufficient and "passing is passing" because no one knows what score you got. Who knows how it will change if scores are made public, but the fact that someone like LurkerTurnedMember, who potentially participates in hiring, would admit to ask what a candidate's score is just shows that this is a real possibility whether we like it or not.

[2TimesTheCharm]

Off topic as well. For those who passed, did you receive a letter today with your MBE score? Or is that not coming for a while. I ask because I want to waive into a different jurisdiction.

Also, someone in the other thread got their results back with a 70 on the first essay without using CA civ pro. Good to know we didn't have to.

[Boltsfan]

You don't receive your scores if you passed the CA bar exam. If you want to waive in to DC or somewhere with your MBE, you ask NCBE and they tell you if your score is high enough or not, but they don't tell you your score.

[aunt_pearl]

Holy fuck. I passed. Second try.

I don't know WHAT my fucking graders were smoking. Must have been some really good shit. I didn't mention modifications at all, I forgot the law on covenants, and I used FRCP the whole way through (with a bit of "CA civ pro is the same" thrown in). Oh and the guy sitting next to me was horking up a lung during the MBE, so my concentration was shot.

For all the people who failed, don't give up hope. Take a few weeks to rest and heal, then get back at it.

The only thing I did differently this time was that I structured EVERYTHING. Every essay (including the PTs) was IRAC'ed to death. And by that I mean everything I wrote was like:

The issue presented is ...

The rule is ...

Here, ...

In conclusion, ...

Also don't forget those dumb little captions you have to put on the tops of essays. Like EVERY contracts practice essay, write "All contracts are governed by either the common law (if they are contracts for services or real estate) or the UCC article 2 (if they are goods contracts). "Goods" are usually defined as tangible, movable objects. Here, the contract concerns ... and so ... will apply" EVERY Evidence essay starts with "California's Truth in Evidence Law (Proposition 8 ) provides that relevant evidence shall not be excluded in a criminal proceeding. Prop 8 is subject to a number of limitations, including hearsay." They are so fucking stupid but they make a difference.