Top Law Schools

There is definitely not only one way to effectively score points on a bar exam essay. I don't mean to claim that there is but I do have a philosophy that I teach students when working with them on this difficult skill. I thought I'd share the blueprint with the readers here for those who are looking for some guidance!

It starts with an initial read through of the facts provided. For every issue that you spot in your initial read-through, you'll want to create at least one IRAC when you write your answer. So, for example, if you spot 7 issues in the initial read-through, you should create at least 7 IRAC’s to analyze all those issues.

And each IRAC should contain the following.

(1): A statement of the issue. You should be concise with the issue statement; the idea here is merely to allow the graders to know that you’ve spotted an issue that they have placed into the facts. That alone will score some points.

(2): Rule statements: In the same paragraph in which you stated your issue you should state all of the law that you will need to later analyze the issue. Think ahead, here. All of your later analysis should be supported by some rule of law, so write down all of the law that you’ll need to later analyze the facts. Then skip a line.

(3): Analyze the facts using the rules you’ve stated in step 2 above. First, provide the graders with transition words such as “here,” or “as per the facts,” or “in this case.” The words aren’t important but it’s important that you let the graders know that you are moving on from stating the law to analyzing the facts. Then begin to analyze. This is where many of the points are earned; you want to use the rules that you've previously written down in step 2 and attach them to the facts provided in order to solve the issue that you stated in step 1. Then skip a line.

(4): Provide the graders with another transition word such as “thus,” “therefore,” or “accordingly,” and then draw a conclusion that follows from your analysis in step 3. The conclusion isn't so important but it's quite important that it follows logically from the analysis.

A very simple example:

The issue is whether x committed a battery against y. Battery is the intentional harmful or offensive contact towards another with causation. Contact is harmful if it causes injury or pain and it is offensive if it would be considered offensive by a reasonable person. The contact with the plaintiff can include anything connected to the plaintiff.

Here, we are told in the facts that y suffered an injury after x forcefully shoved y into the wall. This contact which was direct against y since x made contact with y would likely be deemed harmful since y was injured when he broke his arm. Furthermore, the contact would likely be deemed offensive since a reasonable person in the position of y is likely to be offended by the forcefulness of the contact. In addition, it is not disputed that the injury to y was caused only by x’s act of shoving y into the wall.

Thus, because contact was made directly from x to y, and because x caused y harm by acting in a way that was both harmful and offensive, it is likely that a court would find that a battery was committed.

--Sean (Silverman Bar Exam Tutoring)

Thank you for posting this! Do you think it's necessary to underline or bold important keywords?

I don’t think it’s necessary but there’s really nothing about it that’s bad. Any way to make an answer clearer provided it doesn’t take time away from scoring points is a good thing!

SilvermanBarPrep wrote:(4): Provide the graders with another transition word such as “thus,” “therefore,” or “accordingly,” and then draw a conclusion that follows from your analysis in step 3. The conclusion isn't so important but it's quite important that it follows logically from the analysis.

I had a professor who was a former CA Bar grader, and he said to use the "because" and "therefore" a lot, and to scatter the facts and keywords in the essay throughout your answer, so that the grader has an easier time knowing you're doing good analysis.

He also (jokingly) said that an applicant used a word like "supra" or something, and he was looking for ways to screw that person out of points for being pretentious. lol


Let me ask you this, if you're in a situation where the Bar is asking an oddball question and you have to bs something, is there a technique on what to do?

Personally, I would avoid words like “supra.” I agree with that advice.

Regarding bs, well, that’s tough. Sometimes instinct can guide you and you might actually pull off a decent analysis. Revert to what you think the legal rule should be and go from there. Or skip it entirely since you’ll save time by doing so. A judgment call to make the day of the exam.

Heyall wrote:

SilvermanBarPrep wrote:(4): Provide the graders with another transition word such as “thus,” “therefore,” or “accordingly,” and then draw a conclusion that follows from your analysis in step 3. The conclusion isn't so important but it's quite important that it follows logically from the analysis.

I had a professor who was a former CA Bar grader, and he said to use the "because" and "therefore" a lot, and to scatter the facts and keywords in the essay throughout your answer, so that the grader has an easier time knowing you're doing good analysis.

He also (jokingly) said that an applicant used a word like "supra" or something, and he was looking for ways to screw that person out of points for being pretentious. lol


Let me ask you this, if you're in a situation where the Bar is asking an oddball question and you have to bs something, is there a technique on what to do?

Easy, quote Otter:

"Ladies and gentlemen, I'll be brief. The issue here is not whether we broke a few rules, or took a few liberties with our female party guests - we did. [winks at Dean Wormer] But you can't hold a whole California bar responsible for the behavior of a few, sick twisted individuals. For if you do, then shouldn't we blame the whole bar system? And if the whole bar system is guilty, then isn't this an indictment of our legal institutions in general? I put it to you, my bar examiner brothers - isn't this an indictment of our entire American society? Well, you can do whatever you want to us, but I for one am not going to stand here and listen to you badmouth the United States of America. Gentlemen!"

Thanks for this. I’m taking the Florida bar and I have found your TLS and blog posts extremely helpful.

Do you have any further advice re. organization? I understand IRAC is best for the analytical framework generally, but I often end up wasting time fussing over my formatting. For example if there are two parties who can bring the same claim—but the issue is different for each—I feel the need to start throwing in Roman numerals for the topic heading, and smaller numbers below that for the issue, and even smaller numbers below that for counterarguments. It gets messy and distracts from the substance. Is there are brightline rule to stick by? Thanks!

Wieters wrote:Thanks for this. I’m taking the Florida bar and I have found your TLS and blog posts extremely helpful.

Do you have any further advice re. organization? I understand IRAC is best for the analytical framework generally, but I often end up wasting time fussing over my formatting. For example if there are two parties who can bring the same claim—but the issue is different for each—I feel the need to start throwing in Roman numerals for the topic heading, and smaller numbers below that for the issue, and even smaller numbers below that for counterarguments. It gets messy and distracts from the substance. Is there are brightline rule to stick by? Thanks!

Bright line rules can be a little limiting so I’d rather not go there but (especially in Florida) just try to stick to a blueprint (doesn’t have to be mine!) that will allow the grader to easily understand the logic you employed to draw your conclusions. They are looking for competence, and clear analysis is such a huge part of that!!

SilvermanBarPrep wrote:

Wieters wrote:Thanks for this. I’m taking the Florida bar and I have found your TLS and blog posts extremely helpful.

Do you have any further advice re. organization? I understand IRAC is best for the analytical framework generally, but I often end up wasting time fussing over my formatting. For example if there are two parties who can bring the same claim—but the issue is different for each—I feel the need to start throwing in Roman numerals for the topic heading, and smaller numbers below that for the issue, and even smaller numbers below that for counterarguments. It gets messy and distracts from the substance. Is there are brightline rule to stick by? Thanks!

Bright line rules can be a little limiting so I’d rather not go there but (especially in Florida) just try to stick to a blueprint (doesn’t have to be mine!) that will allow the grader to easily understand the logic you employed to draw your conclusions. They are looking for competence, and clear analysis is such a huge part of that!!

Hi

On a side note, do you know how much of a grade drainer using the wrong rule is? Ie making up or guessing a rule, but with decent analysis.

Im takingthe exam in ca by the way .

Thank you!

It’ll drain some time for sure but throughout the exam we have to take some risks. Go for it if you think you’ll be able to analyze the rule even if it’s not perfect. If it’s a true “shot in the dark” then that time might be better spent elsewhere.

But don’t take the exam with fear. Take some reasonable risks.