The California State Bar's botched roll out of a new exam -- a move that the cash-strapped agency made in the hopes of saving money -- could ultimately end up costing it an additional 5.6 million. Leah T. Wilson, executive director of the State Bar, told state lawmakers at a Senate Judiciary hearing Tuesday that the agency expects to pay around 3 million to offer free exams to test takers, an additional 2 million to book in-person testing sites in July, and 620,000 to return the test to its traditional system of multiple-choice questions in July. Wilson, who announced last week she will step down when her term ends this summer, revealed the costs during a 90-minute hearing called by Sen. Thomas J. Umberg (D-Orange), chair of the Senate Judiciary Committee, to find out what went so "spectacularly wrong." Chaos ensued in February when thousands of test takers seeking to practice law in California sat for the new exam. Some reported they couldn't log into the exam because online testing platforms repeatedly crashed.

The State Bar of California announced Friday that its embattled leader, who has faced growing pressure to resign over the botched February roll out of a new bar exam, will step down in July. Leah T. Wilson, the agency's executive director, informed the Board of Trustees she will not seek another term in the position she has held on and off since 2017. She also apologized for her role in the February bar exam chaos. "Accountability is a bedrock principle for any leader," Wilson said in a statement. "At the end of the day, I am responsible for everything that occurs within the organization. Despite our best intentions, the experiences of applicants for the February Bar Exam simply were unacceptable, and I fully recognize the frustration and stress this experience caused. While there are no words to assuage those emotions, I do sincerely apologize."

An influential California legislator is pressuring the State Bar of California to ditch its new multiple-choice questions after a February bar exam debacle and revert to the traditional test format in July. "Given the catastrophe of the February bar, I think that going back to the methods that have been used for the last 50 years -- until we can adequately test what new methods may be employed -- is the appropriate way to go," Sen. Tom Umberg (D-Orange), chair of the state Senate Judiciary Committee, told The Times. Thousands of test takers seeking to practice law in California typically take the two-day bar exam in July. Reverting to the national system by the National Conference of Bar Examiners, which California has used since 1972, would be a major retreat for the embattled State Bar. Its new exam was rolled out this year as a cost-cutting measure and "historic agreement" that would offer test takers the choice of remote testing.

The California Supreme Court urged the State Bar of California Thursday to explain how and why it utilized artificial intelligence to develop multiple-choice questions for its botched February bar exams. California's highest court, which oversees the State Bar, disclosed Tuesday that its justices were not informed before the exam that the State Bar had allowed its independent psychometrician to use AI to develop a small subset of questions. The Court on Thursday upped its public pressure on the State Bar, demanding it explain how it used AI to develop questions -- and what actions it took to ensure the reliability of the questions. The demand comes as the State Bar petitions the court to adjust test scores for hundreds of prospective California lawyers who complained of multiple technical problems and irregularities during the February exams. Using AI-developed questions written by non-legally-trained psychometricians represents'an obvious conflict of interest,' critics say.

Nearly two months after hundreds of prospective California lawyers complained that their bar exams were plagued with technical problems and irregularities, the state's legal licensing body has caused fresh outrage by admitting that some multiple-choice questions were developed with the aid of artificial intelligence. The State Bar of California said in a news release Monday that it will ask the California Supreme Court to adjust test scores for those who took its February bar exam. But it declined to acknowledge significant problems with its multiple-choice questions -- even as it revealed that a subset of questions were recycled from a first-year law student exam, while others were developed with the assistance of AI by ACS Ventures, the State Bar's independent psychometrician. "The debacle that was the February 2025 bar exam is worse than we imagined," said Mary Basick, assistant dean of academic skills at UC Irvine Law School. Having the questions drafted by non-lawyers using ...

More than 1,600 attorneys have been suspended by the California State Bar for violating rules about client trust accounts that were set up after disgraced L.A. attorney Thomas Girardi allegedly stole millions of dollars from his clients. The Client Trust Account Protection Program, which went into effect last year, requires attorneys to register their client trust accounts annually with the state bar, complete a yearly self-assessment of their practices managing client trust accounts and certify with the state bar that they comply and understand the requirements for safekeeping funds. After the reporting component is fulfilled, the state bar will then begin compliance reviews and investigative audits when appropriate. Originally, more than 1,700 attorneys were found in violation of the rules and enrolled as "inactive" with the bar, meaning they're not legally allowed to practice law. As of Thursday afternoon, that number has dropped to 1,641 after some of the attorneys fulfilled their requirements, according to Special Counsel Steven Moawad, who works for the bar's attorney discipline system.

This program will provide U.S. and European perspectives on intellectual property considerations for use of artificial intelligence ("AI") in the lifecycle of biopharmaceutical products. Specific topics will include AI networks and tools, the AI-biopharma space, patent portfolio considerations, and IP transactional considerations. We hope you will be able to participate in this timely webinar. This program has been approved for 1.00 hour of general distance learning credit by the Pennsylvania CLE Board. This program has also been approved for 1.00 hour of general credit by the State Bar of California and 1.00 hour of areas of professional practice credit (including transitional) by the New York State CLE Board.

Nicole (Niki) Black is an attorney in Rochester, New York and the legal technology evangelist at MyCase.com, a law.