Ray Hayden, J.D.’s Post

Check out the latest article the firm published. American Bar Association ABA TIPS Section

The California Bar took a step in the right direction today by entering into an agreement that is part of making changes to how lawyers are licensed. More and deeper reforms, including a Portfolio Bar Exam option, are still under consideration, but even smaller steps like this new approach to drafting exam content helps move us forward. We can protect the public and use fair licensing requirements. It is time for California to lead the way. Here are the details:

WEEKLY UPDATE: The NCBE posted detailed bar passage statistics for an additional five jurisdictions during the Week of Sept. 17 (Florida, Indiana, Maine, North Dakota, and Wyoming). So far, the NCBE has released comparative bar results on the July 2023 exam for 18 jurisdictions. A total of 4,725 examinees took the bar exam in these 18 jurisdictions, which represents approximately 10 percent of the 45,968 examinees took the July 2023 MBE. Of the 18 jurisdictions, 14 saw an improvement from the July 2022 exam (average increase of 6.29 percentage points) while four jurisdictions saw a decline (average decrease of 2.75 percentage points). https://lnkd.in/gV7HdN4u

Check out the latest on what four jury experts think of the State of the Union with juries in the U.S.

I'm thrilled to announce that the State Bar Board of Trustees just voted 6-2 to pass on our Working Group's proposal for a pilot alternative to the written bar exam, the Portfolio Bar Exam (summary attached). This will allow candidates to demonstrate their competence to practice law in a supervised practice setting and to have independent examiners assess real-world work product. This alternative will be more valid and more equitable. (77.5% of white candidates passed the July 2022 exam, while 40.5% of Black candidates passed. Something is wrong with the current exam.) If the PBE is ultimately adopted, we can expect GREATER public protection, MORE competent attorneys, and a MORE DIVERSE profession. Hoping the CSC will advance equity and excellence in the law by adopting the PBE.

Great news that the State Bar Board of Trustees voted 6-2 to pass the proposal of the Portfolio Bar Exam. The Portfolio Bar Exam still needs final approval from the California Supreme Court. The traditional bar examination, with its rigid focus on memorization and high-stakes testing, has often been a formidable barrier to entry for aspiring lawyers, especially women and individuals from underrepresented backgrounds. Many promising individuals - especially those aspiring to public interest and public service work - are unable to bear the crushing financial costs associated with forgoing employment for three months, coupled with the examination-related expenses. The current system deprives these individuals of a fair chance, while depriving our California communities of the talents and diverse perspective these aspiring lawyers would contribute. WLAC has been dedicated to promoting gender equality and diversity within the legal profession for over forty years. Each year, we see dozens of applications for our stipend program detail firsthand the immense hardships imposed by the current bar exam structure. The portfolio-based bar examination, with its emphasis on a comprehensive evaluation of a candidate's practical legal skills, critical thinking, and problem-solving abilities, represents a beacon of hope. It recognizes that legal excellence transcends rote memorization and offers a more inclusive and equitable pathway for candidates to demonstrate their capabilities. Moreover, it allows candidates to earn a living while preparing, thus alleviating financial stress and making it more accessible to a diverse group of individuals. We are very hopeful that the portfolio-based bar examination will not only level the playing field for aspiring lawyers but also contribute to a more vibrant, representative, and equitable legal profession in California.  

Many people are surprised when I tell them that a bankruptcy case brings together multiple types of law: contract, secured transactions, real estate, litigation, and, yes, even family law. What's more, the relative recency of the Bankruptcy Code's adoption (the Code we use today is less than 50 years old!) allows unexplored nuances to pop up every year. In my recent article for the Minnesota Bankruptcy Bulletin, I explain a recent case by the 8th Circuit BAP which dealt with an uncommon, but not implausible, situation: what happens when an individual files chapter 7, then gets divorced, then converts to chapter 13, and then converts back to chapter 7? What status does a child-support claim (usually given first priority) have if it is post-petition but pre-conversion? And can legislative history help us answer that question? Find out at the link below! Thanks to David M. Tanabe for the editing assistance and thanks to the Minnesota State Bar Association for this great publication!

Jurak v Latham [2023] NSWSC 1318 involved a family provision claim by a child of the late Josef Jurak. The Court emphasised the need for practitioners to bring attention to matters where affected persons may not have been notified or if there are doubts about exercising jurisdiction. The Court also discussed specific aspects of family provision claims, including procedural requirements and the making of consent orders. “The sheer volume of matters which are filed in or allocated to the Succession & Probate List and, in particular, the volume of matters in which practitioners seek consent orders invoking jurisdiction under the Succession Act 2006 (NSW) necessarily has the effect that the Succession & Probate List Judges are heavily reliant upon practitioners not merely providing proposed orders in an orderly form but, additionally, specifically reliant upon practitioners being vigilant to drawing to the attention of the judges matters in which there is some question regarding whether persons who are or might be affected have been notified, any matters occasioning doubt about the exercise of the jurisdiction and any other unusual aspects attending the matter.” at [14]).

Ever wondered what goes into determining the minimum passing bar exam score for a jurisdiction? Dive into Texas’s 2023 standard-setting study and process in the latest Bar Examiner article! Learn more here: https://lnkd.in/gRSe6VKR

Let's continue our #abstract series, giving a glimpse of our newest issue (n° 1/2024). We get now into the case-law contributions. Muki Barkan, Law student at University of California, Berkeley, has written "Balancing the Scales: How the Three Tier System Stands Against the Commerce Clause". "The note examines the cases making up the background to the commented case-law as well as the potential legal consequences for the three-tier system. It takes an especially close look at the U.S. Supreme Court as well as parallel U.S. Circuit Court precedent and lays out the current, contradictory federal regulatory landscape that results. Finally, it reviews the strong dissent written by Justice Wilkinson and how other courts seem to be treating this decision in their citations." Keywords: #barrierstotrade #conflictoflaws #federalism #USA Subscribe Jus Vini here: https://lnkd.in/ejGxb8XS Theodore Georgopoulos Domenico CAVALLO Guillaume Moreno Tracy Genesen John Trinidad Michael Mercurio UBC Okanagan Wine Institute FIVS Bennett Caplan Laurel Parker, J.D. Marc Sorini Beth Hatef Jennifer Niesen Dickenson Peatman & Fogarty Peter Brody Robert M. Tobiassen