News

Prepare for the law exam problems you will actually see

Identify the exam problem type(s) given by each professor

Law professors often present different types of essay exam problems and have different expectations for awarding A’ grades. Identify and concentrate on their choices from their old exams, especially any model answers or examples of ‘A’ exams. The major types are set forth below. Each professor typically has a signature pattern that can be identified early and practiced during the semester.

Type One Exam Problem: Paragraph-based multi-issue problem

By far the Type One problem is still the most common type of law exam problem. It is the classic multi-issue problem, detailed often in a dense fact pattern of one or more pages, presenting a number of parties in a series of paragraph-based mini-problems that are sometimes only loosely tied together and aggregated with a pointed question at the end (e.g., “What charges would you bring against X, Y and Z?” or “What remedies would you seek for A, B, and C?”)

While most of these multi-issue problems raise four to eight issues, some teachers detail an extreme version with even more issues. Or you may see a short version with only a few issues and less allotted time. Time pressure, often 50 or 60 minutes, adds to the challenge of spotting the issues posed by the fact pattern and writing concise and cogent arguments to resolve each issue.

To illustrate this most popular exam type, see in my How To Do Your Best on Law School Exams the “Mary Lee” tort problem (p. 114), and my own “Speluncean Explorers” problem for a criminal law exam at the New York University Law School (pp. 123-124).

Type Two Exam Problem: An overall multi-issue problem and question

The Type Two problem is also a multi-issue problem, but is not paragraph based: you simply cannot mine the separate paragraphs for separate issues. Rather, and in pointed contrast to the Type One approach, you must consider the problem as an overall entity, and then unfold it. Often, the overall issue is an actual or virtual professorial gift (e.g., “Would it be constitutional for New York Courts to assert in personam jurisdiction over D?”), so that the issue-spotting challenge is instead to unfold this broad issue into its sub-issues.

Especially in many contract exams, to spot the issues raised by such a problem requires assessing the back-and-forth paragraphs, rather than simply one paragraph at a time. Do not be misled by erroneous advice that all multi-issue essay problems can always be divided into autonomous paragraphs and then separately mined for paragraph-based issues. They can’t.

For illustrations in my Exam book, see the contract problems (pp. 137-138; 144), and the constitutional law problem (p. 152).

Type Three Exam Problem: Policy Problem

The Type Three problem contrasts markedly with the above two most popular types of multi-issue problems. It is the policy problem. Often, it asks you whether an existing or proposed legislation, rule, principle or practice should be continued, abolished, changed, or adopted, and requires you to specify the policy reasons for and against said proposal and your choice for or against it, with your supporting reasons as the heart of the argument. You could also be asked to draft legislation relating to, for example, so-called tort “reform” or changing sentencing guidelines. The possibilities are almost endless.

Since your task in such problems is specified, there is ordinarily no issue-spotting challenge, but you do have to embrace your assigned role in responding, including argument making from a distinctive perspective, usually as a lawyer, trial or appellate judge, or legislator. For an illustration, see the policy problem on p. (133).

Type Four Exam Problem: Legal issues that spring from but transcend the facts

The far less common Type Four problem also contrasts markedly both with the Type One and Type Two multi-issue problems, as well as the Type Three policy problem. Although triggered by facts, the issue posed is purely legal, rather than the fact-centered issues or the policy-centered issues posed by the first three types of problems.

Consider the following example: when a person is arrested for using vulgar words to a police officer, the issue may be framed as whether a statute criminalizing “offensive words” violates the First Amendment guarantee of freedom of speech? With this broad issue framing, though triggered by the particular facts, you respond with a more abstract level of argument than you would if the issue were only centered on the facts and harm posed by the specific case.

Conclusion

Don’t be intimidated by the challenge here. Sure, Chapter Four in my Exam book that details all the types of problems is dense because I intend the Book to be comprehensive. But you may discover, for example, that a particular professor only gives type one or type two problems. It’s always a micro reality: what does each professor present and expect. And keep in mind that legions of students have developed the skills to traverse this terrain. You can too.