You already know bar exam essay questions are different from law school exam essay questions. Bar exam essay questions are straight-forward: no unnecessary facts, red herrings, or tricks. Unlike law school exam responses which require in-depth analysis, counter-analysis, and policy arguments, bar exam responses should be simple and formulaic with shallow fact application. They are easy but different so you must learn how to construct a strong response.

The title of this post is constructing bar exam essay responses. Not answering or writing essay responses. Constructing. There is a difference. You are being graded on substance, structure, and style, so you have to learn the what and the how. Constructing a response means focusing on the process, not the product.

  • Learn in context: seeing the question is a preview of what you be tested on and how it will appear on the exam. Fact patterns repeat and question structures are often based on a basic pattern. If you identify what those patterns are, you know how to prepare for them.
  • Practice perfect: use your notes/outline when you go through the questions and don’t worry about timing. At this stage, you are learning how to learn: what facts trigger certain issues, how to develop synthesized rule statements, how to produce a response that is complete yet within the character count (3900 characters, including spaces).

Here is an example that illustrates these points:

You get a Torts essay question where the plaintiff is a repair person injured while fixing the sink. She tripped on a tear in the carpet while walking from her toolbox to the sink. You know its negligence and think, “duty, breach, cause, damages” and go to the commercial outline where there are 12 pages on the topic. This is too much information. You flip through and under “duty” you see a section on “landowner liability.” You see that the landowner’s duty depends on the plaintiff’s status at the time of injury and realize that your analysis should focus on this rule, not the general “duty, breach, cause, damages.” You confirm this by looking through the hypo again where you see facts about plaintiff’s status as an invitee as well as the open and obvious defense. You use the outline to craft synthesized rule statements and then work through the problem making sure to apply the specific facts to your rules.  

“Bad Fall”  by  Louish Pixel  Courtesy Flicker
  • Did this take a little longer than 30 minutes? Probably.
  • Do you now have a strategy for how to answer a premises liability question? Yes.
  • Is it a better response than had you tried to use “duty, breach, cause, damages?” Absolutely.

Stop trying to rush the process. It takes time but it will pay off in the end.



Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s