(Image via Getty)
The State Bar of California’s recent inadvertent disclosure of the bar exam topics just days prior to the July test was a serious setback for an agency that has appeared headed in a positive direction on other fronts.
The exam blunder harkened back to prior years in which there was a new bar scandal popping up nearly every month, ranging from ignored unauthorized practice of law complaints to questionable spending decisions.
The California Supreme Court and the bar have vowed to investigate the premature release of the essay and performance test topics, though the snafu has already generated plenty of unflattering headlines and critiques of the agency’s competence.
A particularly unfortunate part of the timing for the bar is that the slip-up comes as the agency appears poised to secure legislative approval for its first annual fee hike in roughly two decades. The bill funding the bar next year will boost the overall fee for active lawyers to $544, a 27 percent increase from the $430 in place now.
Though the bar exam scandal is unlikely to derail the fee increase legislation, it certainly won’t boost lawmakers’ confidence in the oft-criticized agency.
Another more sanguine development the screw-up has overshadowed is the work of a bar task force crafting rules changes designed to spur innovation and bolster access to justice. Proposals under consideration include allowing non-lawyers to own legal services companies and undertake some legal tasks without committing the unauthorized practice of law.
The Task Force on Access Through Innovation of Legal Services will hold its next meeting on August 9 in San Francisco and host a public hearing the next day at the bar’s San Francisco office from 2 p.m. to 5 p.m.
Even the state auditor’s report on the State Bar this year was less critical than prior reports and noted some improvements being made, such as the development of performance measures.
State Bar Trustee Joanna Mendoza, who also serves on access the task force, said the bar has made great strides since she joined its board six years ago. One of the major changes Mendoza was a strong proponent of was the splitting off the bar’s specialty practice groups, known as sections, to become the California Lawyers Association.
She said the early release of the bar exam topics to some law school deans, which prompted the bar to disclose the topics to all test takers, should not minimize the agency’s improvements.
“After working so hard on these reforms, it is incredibly frustrating that all these improvements can be so easily ignored as the result of human error by a single employee,” Mendoza said. “While it was unfortunate that this occurred, some of the attacks against the State Bar as an entire agency based upon a premature email is completely unjustified.
“The investigation will confirm how it happened and help the agency determine how it can therefore be prevented in the future,” Mendoza continued.
The results from the investigation and the performance on the July bar exam will also likely go a long way toward determining the type of impact the State Bar’s major blunder will have on the agency’s reputation moving forward.
Lyle Moran is a freelance writer in San Diego who handles both journalism and content writing projects. He previously reported for the Los Angeles Daily Journal, San Diego Daily Transcript, Associated Press, and Lowell Sun. He can be reached at lmoransun@gmail.com and found on Twitter @lylemoran.