MBE Tip: Dismissing Indictments

"Grant the motion to dismiss the indictment" is going to be a wrong answer in Crim Pro question. The police are going to do some very shady things. Even more shady than other questions (and they do some shady things in other questions), because the test writers want you to think the motion should be granted.

Don't grant it. Rather, the motion you should be considering is the later motion to suppress evidence at trial.

Results Are All In

The 3 lowest pass rates on the February '26 Bar Exam:
New Hampshire (36 test takers): 25%
New Jersey (405 test takers): 30%
Wyoming (20 test takers): 30%

The 3 highest pass rates on the February '26 Bar Exam: 

Mississippi (66 test takers): 73%  

Utah (75 test takers): 69%  

South Carolina (179 test takers): 66%

February '26 Bar Exam Results

Bar Exam results from the February exam have started to roll in. 

Once scores are publicly released, I'll post here in this post the pass percentages for each state. Listed, for comparison, will be the percentages for both February '26 and February '25. Also listed when available will be the number of examinees in each state who took the most recent exam. 

The results are color coded as follows:

Green  = a beat in 2026 compared to 2025 🙂

Red  = a beat in 2025 compared to 2026 ☹️

Blue = a tie in 2025 compared to 2026 😶

Alabama: 

February 2026 Pass Percentage: 33%

February 2025 Pass Percentage: 28%

# of test takers: 318

Alaska: 

February 2026 Pass Percentage: 48%

February 2025 Pass Percentage: 48%

# of test takers: 31

Arizona: 

February 2026 Pass Percentage: 53%

February 2025 Pass Percentage: 51%

# of test takers: 228

Arkansas:

February 2026 Pass Percentage: 36%

February 2025 Pass Percentage: 52%

# of test takers: 84

California:

February 2026 Pass Percentage: 31%

February 2025 Pass Percentage: 64%

# of test takers: 3,931

Colorado: 

February 2026 Pass Percentage: 53%

February 2025 Pass Percentage: 52%

# of test takers: 223

Connecticut:

February 2026 Pass Percentage: 32%

February 2025 Pass Percentage: 34%

# of test takers: 187

Delaware:

February 2026 Pass Percentage: 51%

February 2025 Pass Percentage: 53%

# of test takers: 79

District of Columbia:

February 2026 Pass Percentage: 41%

February 2025 Pass Percentage: 43%

# of test takers: 395

Florida:

February 2026 Pass Percentage: 44%

February 2025 Pass Percentage: 46%

# of test takers: 1,107

Georgia: 

February 2026 Pass Percentage: 53%

February 2025 Pass Percentage: 49%

# of test takers: 479

Hawaii:

February 2026 Pass Percentage: 59%

February 2025 Pass Percentage: 63%

# of test takers: 94

Idaho:

February 2026 Pass Percentage: 46%

February 2025 Pass Percentage: 51%

# of test takers: 48

Illinois: 

February 2026 Pass Percentage: 41%

February 2025 Pass Percentage: 40%

# of test takers: 718

Indiana: 

February 2026 Pass Percentage: 47%

February 2025 Pass Percentage: 47%

# of test takers: 182

Iowa:

February 2026 Pass Percentage: 46%

February 2025 Pass Percentage: 34%

# of test takers: 54

Kansas:

February 2026 Pass Percentage: 48%

February 2025 Pass Percentage: 54%

# of test takers: 62

Kentucky:

February 2026 Pass Percentage: 56%

February 2025 Pass Percentage: 50%

# of test takers: 90

Louisiana:

February 2026 Pass Percentage: 56%

February 2025 Pass Percentage: 56%

# of test takers: 192

Maine: 

February 2026 Pass Percentage: 47%

February 2025 Pass Percentage: 43%

# of test takers: n/a

Maryland: 

February 2026 Pass Percentage: 39%

February 2025 Pass Percentage: 38%

# of test takers: n/a

Massachusetts: 

February 2026 Pass Percentage: 49%

February 2025 Pass Percentage: 46%

# of test takers: 400

Michigan: 

February 2026 Pass Percentage: 47%

February 2025 Pass Percentage: 38%

# of test takers: 326

Minnesota:

February 2026 Pass Percentage: 44%

February 2025 Pass Percentage: 53%

# of test takers: 158

Mississippi: 

February 2026 Pass Percentage: 73%

February 2025 Pass Percentage: 47%

# of test takers: 66

Missouri:

February 2026 Pass Percentage: 51%

February 2025 Pass Percentage: 51%

# of test takers: 179

Montana: 

February 2026 Pass Percentage: 56%

February 2025 Pass Percentage: 41%

# of test takers: 25

Nebraska:

February 2026 Pass Percentage: 41%

February 2025 Pass Percentage: 51%

# of test takers: 41

Nevada: 

February 2026 Pass Percentage: 56%

February 2025 Pass Percentage: 46%

# of test takers: 186

New Hampshire:

February 2026 Pass Percentage: 25%

February 2025 Pass Percentage: 38%

# of test takers: 36

New Jersey:

February 2026 Pass Percentage: 30%

February 2025 Pass Percentage: 37%

# of test takers: 405

New Mexico:

February 2026 Pass Percentage: 42%

February 2025 Pass Percentage: 47%

# of test takers: 102

New York: 

February 2026 Pass Percentage: 41%

February 2025 Pass Percentage: 39%

# of test takers: 3,855

North Carolina:

February 2026 Pass Percentage: 56%

February 2025 Pass Percentage: 50%

# of test takers: 364

North Dakota:

February 2026 Pass Percentage: 57%

February 2025 Pass Percentage: 41%

# of test takers: 37

Ohio:

February 2026 Pass Percentage: 42%

February 2025 Pass Percentage: 43%

# of test takers: 338

Oklahoma: 

February 2026 Pass Percentage: 52%

February 2025 Pass Percentage: 47%

# of test takers: 106

Oregon:

February 2026 Pass Percentage: 42%

February 2025 Pass Percentage: 50%

# of test takers: 103

Pennsylvania: 

February 2026 Pass Percentage: 46%

February 2025 Pass Percentage: 38%

# of test takers: 412

Rhode Island: 

February 2026 Pass Percentage: 58%

February 2025 Pass Percentage: 54%

# of test takers: n/a

South Carolina: 

February 2026 Pass Percentage: 66%

February 2025 Pass Percentage: 54%

# of test takers: 179

South Dakota:

February 2026 Pass Percentage: 41%

February 2025 Pass Percentage: 55%

# of test takers: 32

Tennessee:

February 2026 Pass Percentage: 44%

February 2025 Pass Percentage: 44%

# of test takers: 240

Texas:

February 2026 Pass Percentage: 46%

February 2025 Pass Percentage: 47%

# of test takers: 1,012

Utah:

February 2026 Pass Percentage: 69%

February 2025 Pass Percentage: 72%

# of test takers: 75

Vermont: 

February 2026 Pass Percentage: 61%

February 2025 Pass Percentage: 31%

# of test takers: 31

Virginia: 

February 2026 Pass Percentage: 63%

February 2025 Pass Percentage: 61%

# of test takers: n/a

Washington: 

February 2026 Pass Percentage: 50%

February 2025 Pass Percentage: 43%

# of test takers: 280

West Virginia:

February 2026 Pass Percentage: 42%

February 2025 Pass Percentage: 54%

# of test takers: 31

Wisconsin:

February 2026 Pass Percentage: 48%

February 2025 Pass Percentage: 41%

# of test takers: 54

Wyoming:

February 2026 Pass Percentage: 30%

February 2025 Pass Percentage: 42%

# of test takers: 20

Post-Trial Motions

The writers of the MBE like to test on the topic of motions. There are pretrial motions, motions made during trial, and post-trial motions. This post focuses on the latter: motions made after the verdict. 

There are two motions to keep in mind here, and the first is a motion for a new trial. A party must make this motion within 28 days of the judgment. There are a number of reasons why a judge might grant this motion. 

Each of the following is a potential ground:

~ the judge gave an erroneous jury instruction

~ new evidence was discovered that could not have been discovered before with due diligence. 

~ misconduct was committed by a juror, party, lawyer, or etc. 

~ the judgment is against the weight of the evidence 

~ damages are inadequate or excessive (more on this later). 

The second post-trial motion to note is the motion for relief from order of judgement. The grounds for this motion are more demanding and the timeline in which to make the motion is longer. Rather than 28 days, this motion can be made any time if due to a clerical error, and within a reasonable time (up to a year) if due to anything allowable other than a clerical error. 

Specifically, the following grounds are allowable:

~ clerical error

~ mistake, or excusable neglect

~fraud, misrepresentation, or misconduct by the opposing party

~ newly discovered evidence that could not have been discovered with due diligence with enough time to make a motion for a new trial and existed at the time of trial

~ a void judgment 

The next topic does not specifically fall under the category of a motion, but is motion adjacent. Rather than moving for a new trial if damages are inadequate or excessive, the court might suggest remittitur and additur. 

With remittitur, the court offers plaintiff the choice as to whether to reduce the damages decided by the jury or to accept a new trial. Additur is similar to remittitur, but with a twist: the defendant is given the option as to whether to increase the damages award or to accept a new trial. An important distinction here is that although remittitur is allowable in both state and federal court, additur is only allowable in state court. The Seventh Amendment prevents a federal court from recognizing additur. 

NextGen UBE: Foundational Skills (Legal Writing & Drafting)

There are four categories of "foundational skills" that the NextGen UBE aims to test:

Group A: Issue Spotting and Analysis, Investigation, and Evaluation

Group B: Client Counseling and Advising, Negotiation and Dispute Resolution, Client Relationship and Management

Group C: Legal Research

Group D: Legal Writing and drafting 

This post will focus on Group D: According to the NCBE, the purpose of Group D is to assess the extent to which an examinee can complete a legal writing or drafting task based on the relevant rules and standards and consistent with a client's objectives, interests, and constraints. The specific tasks that will be tested to measure this purpose are as follows: 

~Draft or edit correspondence to a client explaining the legal implications of a course of action, updating the client on the status of a client's matter, and/or providing advice on the next steps to be taken in a matter. 

~Given draft sections of a complaint or an answer to a complaint in a matter, identify language that should be changed, and make suggestions on how that language should change, consistent with the facts, the relevant legal rules and standards, and the client's objectives, interests, and constraints. 

~Given draft sections of affidavits that must be submitted to the court or other tribunal in a matter, identify the best affiant and best language to support each element to be proved, consistent with the facts, the relevant legal rules and standards, and the client's objectives, interests, and constraints. 

~Given draft provisions of a contract or other legal document, identify language that should be changed, explain why it should be changed, and suggest how that language should change, consistent with the facts, the relevant legal rules and standards, and the client's objectives, interests, and constraints. 

~Given a collection of legal sources, draft specified sections of a document, such as a memo, a persuasive brief or letter, or another common document, demonstrating skill at formulating an original legal analysis. 

~Draft or revise discovery documents consistent with the facts, the relevant legal rules and standards, and the client's objectives, interests, and constraints. 

NextGen UBE: Foundational Skills (Legal Research)

There are four categories of "foundational skills" that the NextGen UBE aims to test:

Group A: Issue Spotting and Analysis, Investigation, and Evaluation

Group B: Client Counseling and Advising, Negotiation and Dispute Resolution, Client Relationship and Management

Group C: Legal Research

Group D: Legal Writing and drafting 

This post will focus on Group C: According to the NCBE, the purpose of Group C is to assess the extent to which an examinee can identify and implement legal research strategies, including preliminary issue-spotting, working with provided resources, developing and refining a theory of the case, and reaching closure on research questions. The specific tasks that will be tested to measure this purpose are as follows: 

~In a matter that requires legal research, identify the research questions that need to be answered. 

~Identify ambiguities in the language, standards, elements, or factors of a provided resource.

~Identify efficient legal research strategies, methods, or tools (including appropriate search terms) that are likely to uncover other legal sources or documents that are likely to assist in the interpretation of a provided resource to advance your understanding of a client's position.

~Given a collection of legal sources, identify the roles and characteristics of the sources, including their authoritative weight.

~Given one or more judicial opinions, identify the facts in a matter that are analogous to and/or distinct from the dispositive facts in the opinions.

~Given a collection of legal sources, identify other sources, search terms, or research strategies that might be used to update sources or find additional sources. 

~Given a collection of legal sources, identify which sources are relevant to or dispositive of a legal issue in the matter. 

~Given a collection of legal sources, identify whether the sources are sufficient to complete an assigned research task or other lawyering task. 

NextGen UBE: Foundational Skills (Negotiation and Dispute Resolution, Client Relationship and Management)

There are four categories of "foundational skills" that the NextGen UBE aims to test:

Group A: Issue Spotting and Analysis, Investigation, and Evaluation

Group B: Client Counseling and Advising, Negotiation and Dispute Resolution, Client Relationship and Management

Group C: Legal Research

Group D: Legal Writing and drafting 

This post will focus on Group B: According to the NCBE, the purpose of Group B is to assess the extent to which an examinee can identify lawyering strategies within the lawyer-client relationship, based on the relevant rules and standards and consistent with a client's objective, interests, and constraints. The specific tasks that will be tested to measure this purpose are as follows: 

~Identify which claims to recommend bringing. which remedies to recommend seeking, which evidence to present, which arguments or defenses to raise, or how to respond to arguments or defenses, and in a transactional matter which provisions to recommend including, based on the relevant legal rules and standards and consistent with a client's objectives, interests, and constraints. 

~In a matter requiring review of provided materials, such as police reports, interview excerpts, or discovery, identify gaps in information obtained, suggestions for improvement, and/or grounds for objection (if applicable).

~Identify two factors that favor a client's position or two factors that favor an opposing party's position in a matter. 

~Identify two benefits or two drawbacks of a proposed resolution of a dispute, consistent with a client's objectives, interests, and constraints. 

~Identify potential terms of a contract or settlement agreement that could advance negotiation or resolution.

~In a matter in which a client has multiple stated objectives, explain why a legal rule or principle, as applied to the client's situation, may make one of those stated objectives attainable or unattainable. 

~Determine the best strategy to identify the client's needs and achieve the client's goal and objectives.

It's worth noting that the Group B skill is also where a small selection of the Model Rules of Professional Conduct will be tested. 

NextGen UBE: Foundational Skills ( Issue Spotting and Analysis, Investigation and Evaluation)

There are four categories of "foundational skills" that the NextGen UBE aims to test:

Group A: Issue Spotting and Analysis, Investigation, and Evaluation

Group B: Client Counseling and Advising, Negotiation and Dispute Resolution, Client Relationship and Management

Group C: Legal Research

Group D: Legal Writing and drafting 

This post will focus on Group A: According to the NCBE, the purpose of Group A is to assess the extent to which an examinee can apply fundamental legal principles and legal reasoning to analyze given fact patterns. The specific tasks that will be tested to measure this purpose are as follows: 

~Identify which legal concepts and principles are likely to affect the outcome of a matter based on the information provided.

~Identify which facts are likely to be relevant to or dispositive of a legal issue in a matter. 

~Identify the applicable standards of review and/or burdens of proof that will apply to legal issues in a matter.

~Identify the strengths and weakness's of a client's position or an opposing party's position based on the relevant legal rules and standards. 

~In a matter that requires additional factual development, identify which facts need to be investigated, or the best strategy for investigating or eliciting those facts, in order to be able to evaluate the strengths and weaknesses of a client's position or an opposing party's position based on the relevant legal rules and standards. 

~Assess the probable outcome of a claim, motion, discovery matter, defense, or objection based on the relevant legal rules and standards.

~Identify the applicable or dispositive language, standards, elements, or factors of a provided resource (such as a statute, contract, or judicial opinion). 

The next post will focus on Group B!

The Structure of the NextGen UBE

There's plenty yet to learn about the NextGen UBE. But with a few jurisdictions administering the exam as early as this coming July, it's important to understand some basic facts about this test. Below are some fundamentals about this new exam. This post here focuses more on the structure of the exam; future posts will have a heavier focus on content. 

~ The test runs 9 hours. There are three sessions: a morning session of 3 hours, an afternoon session of 3 hours, and then one additional morning session of 3 hours. As for a second 3-hour afternoon session, that won't be a part of the NextGen exam, but I do expect some jurisdictions to take advantage of that time period to administer a state-specific component. 

~Each of the three sessions of the exam has the exact same format: 40 multiple choice questions, 2 integrated question sets, and one performance task. Adding up the three sessions amount to in total 120 multiple choice questions, 6 integrated question sets, and 3 performance tasks. Not all multiple choice questions count towards the score: 100 of the 120 count, and 20 are used as experimental questions for future tests. Likewise, 1 of the 6 integrated question sets will be a non-scored experimental section.

~In each of the three sessions, test takers will have 72 minutes to answer the multiple choice questions (1.8 minutes per question), 48 minutes to answer the integrated question sets (24 minutes per set), and 60 minutes to answer the performance task.

~Multiple choice questions are presented in two formats; in one format you're asked to select 1 answer from a list of 4 answers; in the other format, you're asked to select 2 answers from a list of 6 answers. Partial credit is available when asked to select 2 answers. 

~Integrated Question sets are presented in two formats: drafting sets and counseling sets. Drafting sets contain one medium-length question, and there are two types: one type provides a draft document (or sections of a draft document), and asks candidates to identify errors while explaining the errors or suggesting revisions. The other type asks candidates to draft a document or portions of a document. Counseling sets contain both short answer questions and multiple choice questions. Partial credit is available except for multiple choice questions requiring only one answer. 

~Performance tasks are presented in two formats: standard performance tasks which focus on a single, longer writing assignment, and legal research performance tasks which include multiple choice questions and short answer questions, followed by a medium answer question. Partial credit is available except for multiple choice questions requiring only one answer. 

~The lowest scaled score that one can receive on the NextGen UBE is 500; the highest scaled score that one can receive is 750.  Multiple choice questions contribute to 49% of the score, integrated question sets contribute to 21% of the scaled score, and performance tasks contribute to 30% of the score. 

Look out for more on this exam, as more information is disclosed! 

Good Luck!

All best to those who are preparing for the February bar exam! Posting will resume soon after the exam to assist with the LSAT and the Bar Exam (including the NextGen UBE). Keep an eye out for a post organizing all of the February bar exam results as they come in. 

Conclusions on Essays

A student asked a question that I thought was important enough to address here. 

Definite conclusions are not necessary on a bar exam. There may be times when a conclusion is definite (I'm thinking of, say, an issue asking whether diversity jurisdiction is satisfied), but the fact that some conclusions are definite does not mean that you've done something wrong if some of your conclusions are indefinite. In fact, and this is something that over the years, I've seen students struggle with, the bar exam writers are looking for nuance: they are looking for answers that understand and respect the complexity in a given legal issue and aren't so quick to advocate for one side winning, even if the question tells you that you represent a specific party in the lawsuit. Most answers do have one side that is stronger than the other, and the conclusion is an opportunity to let the graders know that you recognize that. But not all answers. For some, the best conclusion is that more information is needed to draw a conclusion. When you get into advocacy mode and decide that in order to convince the graders that you've come up with the right conclusion you've got to downplay any strengths of the opposing side, you end up leaving many points on the table. Get those points; they'll benefit you more than they'll benefit the table.

Bar Exam Essay Writing Tips

The framework here does take time and effort to get good at. But, (and I don’t mean to say that this is the only way to write a bar exam essay), it’s the approach I teach to maximize scores.

Spot the legal issue. Let the graders know you’ve spotted it. Clearly and succinctly. Write down the legal rule(s) that will help you to analyze the legal issue. Here’s the part that takes practice. Although you’re writing down the full rule(s), you have to work on seeing the individual components of the rule. Not the engine, each component of the engine. Certain components might need their own definitions. In your mind, that rule has to break up into component parts, because legal analysis requires analyzing each component part of a rule. Might come naturally for some; others might need lots of practice. Analyze each component part of the rule by explaining how both sides will claim that the individual component benefits them. So, for example, “contact” is a component of battery in Torts. If it’s questionable if contact was made, explain what both sides will say about this. It may true that as to a specific component, the argument only runs one way. Don’t force those; that’s fine, too. Once you’ve analyzed each component (when applicable), bring all the components back together to draw a probable conclusion as to how the issue you’ve spotted will likely be resolved.