The Virginia Bar Exam is developed and administered by The Virginia Board of Bar Examiners and the National Conference of Bar Examiners (NCBE®). The Virginia Essay Exam assesses an examinee's understanding of the rules of law of the Commonwealth of Virginia, while the Multistate Bar Examination (MBE®) is a component of the Uniform Bar Examination (UBE®).
This article will cover the details of the Virginia Bar Exam, including exam results, requirements, important dates and deadlines, subjects, costs and fees, format, and scoring.
Virginia Bar Exam Structure
The VA Bar Exam is split between two days. Each day is divided into two three-hour sessions.
| Virginia Bar Exam Format | ||
|---|---|---|
| Morning (3-hour session) |
Afternoon (3-hour session) |
|
| Day One | 5 essay questions | 4 essay questions + 10 multiple choice questions |
| Day Two | 100 MBE multiple-choice questions | 100 MBE multiple-choice questions |
On day one, you'll have three hours to answer five essay questions in the morning, and another three hours to answer four essay questions and ten multiple choice questions in the afternoon. These time constraints give you approximately 36 minutes to complete each item.
On day two, you'll have three hours to answer 100 MBE multiple-choice questions in the morning and again in the afternoon, giving you about 1 minute and 48 seconds to answer each question.
Virginia Bar Exam Dates, Requirements, and Scheduling
The Virginia Bar Exam is administered twice a year. Once in February and again in July. Preparing your application and submitting it before the deadline is of ultimate importance. Virginia does not have a late filing period. If you fail to meet the filing deadline, you must wait for the next bar exam.
Exam Dates
Dates for the 2024 Virginia Bar Exam are February 27-28 and July 30-31. Applications, along with fees and attachments, must be submitted to the Office of the Secretary on or before the filing deadline. First-time applicants must also submit a completed Character and Fitness Questionnaire.
| Filing Periods | Application Opens | Filing Deadline |
|---|---|---|
| February Bar Exam (Feb 27-28, 2024) |
90 days prior to deadline | December 15, 2023 |
| July Bar Exam (July 30-31, 2024) |
90 days prior to deadline | May 10, 2024 |
| Fee | $575 | |
For more information, including required document list visit the Virginia Board of Bar Examiners website.
Requirements
To sit for the VA Bar Exam, applicants must submit evidence that they meet at least one of the following requirements:
- Have a Juris Doctorate (JD) degree from an American Bar Association (ABA)/Virginia Board of Bar Examiners approved law school
- Be enrolled and in good standing at a law school approved by the ABA or the Board, and have completed at least five semesters (or its equivalent) of full-time study
- Get approved by the Board and complete a required period of law study (see the Law Reader Program Rule and Regulations of the Virginia Board of Bar Examiners)
- Complete a degree from a non-ABA approved law school, then complete an LL.M. degree from an ABA-approved law school, and be admitted to practice law before the highest court in any jurisdiction in the US
Scheduling
To schedule Virginia Bar Exam, you must fill out an application, submit all the proper documentation, pay requisite fees, and carefully follow instructions enumerated on the Board's website.
Virginia Bar Exam Costs and Fees
Filing an original application for the Virginia Bar Exam costs $575. There is an additional $575 fee to submit a Character and Fitness Questionnaire. All important fees are tabulated below.
| Application Type | Fees |
|---|---|
| Original Application | $575 |
| Re-application | $575 |
| Update Previously Filed Application | $175 |
| Character and Fitness Questionnaire | $575 |
| Character and Fitness Update | $175 |
| Others | Fees |
| Admission without Examination | $2,500 |
| MBE Score Advisory Request | $30 |
| MBE Score Transfer Request | $50 |
| Incorrect Payment Fee | $50 |
| Laptop Program | $125 |
Payments must be made payable to "The Virginia Board of Bar Examiners" via one or more money orders, cashier's checks, or certified checks. Fees must be paid before the filing deadline upon submission of an application.
Cost-Saving Options
It's no secret that the entire law school journey is an expensive proposition. Thankfully, many scholarships are available to law students and graduates to help offset some of the costs associated with legal education and the early stages of a legal career.
The University of Virginia School of Law has compiled a comprehensive list of external scholarships designed to help law students with the costs associated with law school, bar exam registration, and bar preparation. As a Virginia Bar Exam applicant, it's in your best interest to research these and other resources and apply to as many available scholarships to help you with your bar exam registration and/or bar prep costs. You may view the list here: External Scholarships | University of Virginia School of Law.
Virginia Bar Exam Subjects and Topics
The VA Bar Exam tests an examinee's knowledge and understanding of foundational legal principles and the unique rules of law of the Commonwealth of Virginia. Furthermore, Virginia has adopted the MBE component of the UBE, which covers federal law across seven subjects.
The following MBE subjects are tested on the Virginia Bar Exam:
- Civil Procedure
- Constitutional Law
- Contracts
- Criminal Law and Procedure
- Evidence
- Real Property
- Torts
You may find a complete list of subjects, subtopics, and summaries on our MBE Subject Matter Outline.
Virginia-Specific Essays
Both the long-form and short-answer questions will test VA Bar Exam applicants on the following fourteen subjects:
UWorld MBE Sample Questions
A husband and wife were married in State A and lived there for 10 years before separating. One month later, the wife permanently moved to State B and immediately filed for divorce in a federal court in State B. The wife claims that she is entitled to $300,000 in alimony. The husband appeared in the action and has filed a motion to dismiss for lack of subject-matter jurisdiction.
Should the court grant the motion?
- No, because the court has diversity jurisdiction over the case.
- No, because the husband waived a subject-matter jurisdiction challenge by appearing in the case.
- Yes, because state courts have exclusive jurisdiction over this type of action.
- Yes, because the wife did not establish a domicile in State B.
Explanation:
| Federal diversity jurisdiction exceptions |
|
Federal courts cannot exercise diversity jurisdiction over cases involving:
|
A federal court must possess subject-matter jurisdiction to hear the merits of a case before it. Subject-matter jurisdiction can be established through either:
- federal-question jurisdiction – when a claim arises under the U.S. Constitution, a treaty, or federal law (not seen here) or
- diversity jurisdiction – when the amount in controversy exceeds $75,000 and the opposing parties are citizens of different states.
Here, diversity jurisdiction is established since the wife claims that she is entitled to $300,000 and the parties are citizens of different states (States A and B). However, federal courts cannot exercise diversity jurisdiction over cases involving probate matters or domestic relations. Instead, state courts have exclusive jurisdiction over these types of actions (Choice A).* Therefore, the husband's motion to dismiss should be granted.
(Choice B) A challenge to subject-matter jurisdiction is never waived. However, a challenge to personal jurisdiction is waived if the defendant has voluntarily appeared in the case, unless it was a special appearance for the express purpose of objecting to personal jurisdiction.
(Choice D) An individual is a citizen of the state where he/she is domiciled—ie, physically present with the intent to remain indefinitely. Since the wife permanently moved to State B, she has established her domicile there.
Educational objective:
Federal courts cannot exercise diversity
jurisdiction over cases involving probate matters or domestic relations. Instead, state courts
have exclusive jurisdiction over these types of cases.
Bluebook Citations :
- Ankenbrandt v. Richards, 504 U.S. 689, 703–04 (1992) (explaining the domestic-relations exception to diversity jurisdiction).
A congressional committee investigated the pharmaceutical industry and found that the high cost of prescription drugs purchased and sold in the United States negatively impacted the nation's economy and the health of its citizens. In response, Congress passed a statute that regulates "the retail prices of every purchase or sale of prescription drugs in the United States."
A group of pharmaceutical companies challenged the constitutionality of this statute in federal court.
What is the strongest argument in support of the constitutionality of this statute?
- Congress may enact statutes for the general welfare.
- Congress may regulate the prices of all domestic purchases and sales of goods.
- The Constitution grants Congress the power to regulate the interstate transportation of prescription drugs.
- The purchases and sales of prescription drugs in the United States substantially impact interstate commerce in the aggregate.
Explanation:
The commerce clause gives Congress broad power to regulate interstate and foreign commerce. This includes:
- the channels of interstate and foreign commerce (eg, roadways)
- the instrumentalities of interstate and foreign commerce (eg, vehicles)
- persons and things moving in interstate or foreign commerce (eg, goods and services) and
- in-state activities that, singly or in the aggregate, substantially impact interstate or foreign commerce.
Since Congress's commerce power is broad, federal statutes are constitutional if there is any rational basis for concluding that the regulated activity substantially affects interstate or foreign commerce. This can be shown through express congressional findings.
Here, the federal statute regulates the retail prices of prescription drugs in the United States. Congress has the authority to regulate such products' interstate transportation, but this statute also regulates in-state purchases and sales (Choice C). Since the congressional committee found that the high cost of prescription drugs negatively impacted the nation's economy, it is rational to conclude that their aggregated in-state purchases and sales substantially impact interstate commerce. Therefore, this is the strongest argument to support this statute.
(Choice A) The taxing and spending clause empowers Congress to tax and spend for the general welfare. But regulating prices is not equivalent to taxing or spending.
(Choice B) Congress cannot regulate the prices of every domestic purchase and sale of goods since it cannot regulate purely in-state sales that do not substantially affect interstate commerce.
Educational objective:
The commerce clause empowers Congress to regulate (1)
channels and instrumentalities of, (2) persons and things moving in, and (3) in-state activities
that—singly or in the aggregate—substantially affect interstate or foreign commerce.
Bluebook Citations :
- Gonzales v. Raich, 545 U.S. 1, 17 (2005) (explaining Congress's broad authority under the commerce clause).
The owner of a new office building contracted with a well-known landscaper to design and install landscaping around the building for $30,000. The agreement was memorialized in writing, was signed by both parties, and called for a budget of $5,000 for trees, shrubs, sod, and materials. The contract required the landscaper to complete the work within six months. Due to an unexpected increase in the price of trees and shrubs, the landscaper abandoned the project and never completed any of the work.
Three years after the landscaper's deadline, the building owner sued the landscaper for breach of contract. In the jurisdiction, the statute of limitations for breach of a services contract is two years after the breach, and the statute of limitations for breach of a sale-of-goods contract is four years.
Can the owner recover damages from the landscaper?
- No, because the contract is divisible with respect to the services and goods, and the landscaper's breach is therefore subject to the two-year statute of limitations.
- No, because the contract primarily calls for services, and the landscaper's breach is therefore subject to the two-year statute of limitations.
- Yes, because the landscaper's breach was a result of an increase in the price of goods, and his breach is therefore subject to the four-year statute of limitations.
- Yes, because the landscaper's breach was willful, and he is therefore estopped from denying that his breach is subject to the four-year statute of limitations.
Contracts for the sale of goods are governed by Article 2 of the Uniform Commercial Code (UCC), while contracts for services are governed by common law. However, some contracts involve the sale of goods and the rendering of services. To determine which law applies to a "mixed" or "hybrid" contract, courts ask whether its predominant purpose was the sale of goods or the rendering of services. The following factors are relevant to this determination:
- The contract's language
- The nature of the supplier's business (ie, whether it typically provides goods or services)
- The relative value of the goods and services
- The nature of the final product (ie, whether it can be described as a good or service)
Here, the building owner contracted to buy goods (eg, trees, shrubs, sod) and services (ie, designing and installing the landscaping). The owner likely hired the well-known landscaper due to his skill in performing landscaping services, and the $5,000 budget for goods was just one-sixth of the $30,000 contract price. Therefore, the contract primarily calls for services and is subject to the jurisdiction's two-year statute of limitations. And since the owner sued three years after the breach, the owner cannot recover damages from the landscaper.
(Choice A) The predominant-purpose test is unnecessary when a contract is divisible—ie, when the payment for goods can easily be separated from the payment for services. But here, the contract is likely indivisible since it combined the sale of the trees, shrubs, and sod with their installation.
(Choices C & D) The predominant-purpose test focuses on the parties' reason for entering the contract—not for breaching it. Therefore, it is irrelevant that the landscaper's breach was (1) a result of an increase in the price of goods or (2) willful.
Educational objective:
Sale-of-goods contracts are governed by the UCC,
while services contracts are governed by common law. When a contract calls for the sale of goods
AND the rendering of services, the contract's primary purpose determines whether the UCC or
common law applies.
Bluebook Citations :
- Bonebrake v. Cox, 499 F.2d 951, 960 (8th Cir. 1974) (applying the predominant-purpose test to determine which statute of limitations applies to a mixed contract for goods and services).
- Princess Cruises, Inc. v. Gen. Elec. Co., 143 F.3d 828, 833 (4th Cir. 1998) (listing factors that courts consider when applying the predominant-purpose test).
A man and a woman dated for several weeks. During that time, the man repeatedly asked the woman to have sex. Each time, the woman responded that she would not have sex with the man unless they were married. One evening, the man promised the woman that they would elope the following weekend if she would agree to have sex. The woman agreed and the couple had sex. The following weekend, the man told the woman that he had no intention of eloping and only made that promise to get the woman's consent. The woman reported the man to the police, who later arrested and charged the man with rape.
Is the man guilty of rape?
- No, because fraud in factum did not negate the woman's consent.
- No, because fraud in the inducement did not negate the woman's consent.
- Yes, because the woman's consent was obtained by fraud in factum.
- Yes, because the woman's consent was obtained by fraud in the inducement.
Explanation:
| Consent to sexual intercourse obtained by fraud | ||
| Type of fraud | Definition | Effect |
| In factum |
|
Negates victim's consent |
| In inducement |
|
Does not negate victim's consent |
In most modern jurisdictions, rape is defined as sexual intercourse with another without that person's consent.* This means that rape did not occur if the victim consented to sexual intercourse. However, a victim's consent may be ineffective if it was obtained by fraud. There are two types of fraud:
- Fraud in factum – when consent is obtained by fraud regarding the nature of the act itself, leaving the victim unaware that he/she consented to sexual intercourse and negating the victim's consent
- Fraud in the inducement – when consent is obtained by fraud regarding what the victim knows is an act of sexual intercourse, which does not negate the victim's consent
As a result, consent obtained by fraud in factum is not a valid defense to rape, but consent obtained by fraud in the inducement is a valid defense.
Here, the man falsely promised the woman that they would elope if she agreed to have sex with him. Since the woman knew that the act to which she consented was sexual intercourse, her consent was obtained by fraud in the inducement (Choices A & C). This type of fraud did not negate the woman's consent, so the man is not guilty of rape (Choice D).
Educational objective:
Fraud in factum occurs when the fraud pertains to the nature of the act itself and negates a rape victim's consent. In contrast, fraud in the inducement occurs when fraud is used to gain consent to what the victim knows is an act of sexual intercourse and does not negate the victim's consent.
A plaintiff sued a defendant for negligence to recover damages that the plaintiff suffered as a result of a crash between the two parties. At trial, the plaintiff's attorney called the plaintiff's wife to testify as to what she witnessed on the day of the crash. On cross-examination of the wife, the defendant's lawyer elicited several responses that tended to show that the plaintiff's actions constituted contributory negligence. The plaintiff's attorney seeks to ask the wife several questions on redirect examination, but the defendant's attorney objected.
What is the strongest argument that the court must allow redirect examination of the wife?
- The plaintiff's attorney failed to provide all significant information on direct examination.
- The plaintiff's attorney seeks to reiterate the necessary elements of the claim.
- The plaintiff's attorney seeks to reply to all matters raised on cross-examination.
- The plaintiff's attorney seeks to reply to significant new matters raised on cross-examination.
Explanation:
Federal Rule of Evidence 611 gives trial courts the authority to exercise reasonable control over the mode and order of examining witnesses at trial. This includes the discretion to determine whether—and to what extent—redirect examination of witnesses should be permitted. But when a party raises a significant new matter while cross-examining a witness, the court must allow the opposing party to address that matter through redirect examination.
Therefore, the strongest argument for allowing redirect examination of the plaintiff's wife is that the plaintiff's attorney seeks to reply to significant new matters that were raised on cross-examination.
(Choice A) A party is expected to elicit all significant information during direct examination of a witness. Therefore, a court need not permit redirect examination to allow the party to provide information inadvertently omitted on direct examination.
(Choices B & C) Redirect examination is generally limited to significant new matters raised on cross-examination. Therefore, a party is not entitled to redirect examination to (1) reiterate information like the necessary elements of the claim or (2) reply to all matters addressed in cross-examination.
Educational objective:
When a party raises a significant new matter on cross-examination of a witness, the court must allow redirect examination by the opposing party to address that matter.
Bluebook Citations :
- Fed. R. Evid. 611 (explaining the mode and order of examining witnesses).
Twenty years ago, a man who owned a 20-acre ranch agreed to sell all of his mineral rights to his neighbor. The man executed a warranty deed conveying the mineral estate to the neighbor, who failed to record the deed.
The following year, a woman moved her mobile home onto an undeveloped five-acre portion of the man's ranch. After the woman had lived on the property for 10 years, a local drilling company began operations on a nearby tract to drill a natural gas well. Believing that the woman owned the property, the drilling company approached the woman about leasing the mineral rights on her property and requested that the woman sign a lease of her mineral rights. The woman signed the lease as requested, and it was promptly and properly recorded. The drilling operations were successful, and the drilling company prepared to distribute profits from royalties. However, a dispute arose between the neighbor and the woman, as both parties claim ownership of the minerals.
The period of time to acquire title by adverse possession in the jurisdiction is 10 years.
In an action to determine title, is the court likely to award title to the mineral estate to the woman?
- No, because the woman actually possessed only the surface estate that had previously been severed from the mineral estate.
- No, because the woman did not actually possess the mineral estate until she signed the lease of the mineral rights.
- Yes, because the neighbor failed to record the warranty deed conveying the mineral estate.
- Yes, because the woman adversely possessed both the surface estate and the mineral estate for the statutory period.
Explanation:
An adverse possessor can acquire title to land owned by another if his/her possession of the land is:
- Open and notorious – apparent or visible to a reasonable owner
- Continuous – uninterrupted for the statutory period
- Exclusive – not shared with the owner
- Actual – physical presence on the land and
- Nonpermissive – hostile and adverse to the owner.
If the surface and mineral estates are owned by the same party, then the adverse possessor will acquire title to both estates—even if only one estate is actually possessed. But if the mineral estate has been severed from the surface estate (ie, the surface and mineral estates are owned by different parties), then the adverse possessor will only acquire title to the estate that is actually possessed. The mineral estate is actually possessed when the adverse possessor mines or drills wells on the land.
Here, the neighbor purchased the mineral estate from the man, thereby severing the mineral estate from the surface estate. And since the woman merely lived on the property for the 10-year statutory period—she did not attempt to mine or drill a well on the mineral estate—she actually possessed only the surface estate during that time (Choice D). This means that the woman did not adversely possess the mineral estate, and the court is not likely to award her title to that estate.
(Choice B) Adverse possession of a mineral estate requires the commencement of drilling or mining operations. Merely signing a lease of the mineral rights is not enough.
(Choice C) A deed need not be recorded to be valid, so the neighbor's failure to record has no impact on whether the woman adversely possessed the mineral estate.
Educational objective:
If a mineral estate has previously been severed from the surface estate (ie, surface and minerals owned by different persons), then an adverse possessor can only acquire title to the mineral estate by actually possessing the minerals (eg, by mining or drilling wells).
A teenager was riding a bicycle when she saw a classmate walking toward her. The teenager rode quickly toward the classmate, knowing that he would think she would run into him on her current trajectory. The teenager was not purposefully trying to harm or touch him. The classmate saw the teenager riding toward him and yelled at her to stop. The teenager swerved at the last moment and avoided hitting him. The classmate had a panic attack because he thought that the teenager would hit him.
Is the classmate likely to succeed if he sues the teenager for assault?
- No, because the teenager did not make contact with the classmate.
- No, because the teenager did not purposefully try to harm or touch the classmate.
- Yes, because the teenager acted with the requisite intent.
- Yes, because the teenager's conduct was extreme and outrageous.
Explanation:
Assault occurs when (1) a defendant intends to cause the plaintiff to anticipate an imminent, and harmful or offensive, contact with the plaintiff's person and (2) the defendant's affirmative conduct causes the plaintiff to anticipate such contact. The intent requirement is met when the defendant acts with either:
- purpose – the desire to cause anticipation of an imminent harmful or offensive contact or
- knowledge – the substantial certainty that the plaintiff will suffer such anticipation.
Here, the teenager rode her bicycle directly at her classmate, causing him to think that she would hit him (anticipation of imminent contact). And since the teenager knew with substantial certainty that the classmate would think she would run into him, she acted with the requisite intent. As a result, the classmate is likely to succeed in a suit against the teenager for assault.
(Choice A) Assault merely requires that the plaintiff be placed in anticipation of imminent contact. Actual bodily contact is not required. Therefore, the fact that the teenager did not make contact with the classmate is irrelevant.
(Choice B) The intent to make contact with the plaintiff is a requirement for battery, but assault merely requires the intent to cause the plaintiff to anticipate imminent contact. Therefore, the fact that the teenager did not purposefully try to harm or touch the classmate does not absolve her of liability for assault.
(Choice D) Extreme and outrageous conduct (i.e., conduct that is unacceptable in civilized society) is an element of intentional infliction of emotional distress—not assault, which only requires intentional conduct.
Educational objective:
For assault, intent exists when a defendant acts with the purpose (desire) or knowledge (substantial certainty) that his/her conduct will cause the plaintiff to anticipate an imminent, and harmful or offensive, contact.
- Restatement (Third) of Torts: Intentional Torts to Persons § 105 (Am. L. Inst., Tentative Draft No. 1, 2015) (providing the elements for assault).
Take a look at a typical competitor sample question. Their practice questions might parody the exam, but ours consistently meet or exceed exam-level difficulty. Their limited explanations address the correct answer choice but do not go the extra mile to explain the wrong choices – so you don’t make the same mistakes on exam day.
A mother gave her land to her two kids, a son, and a daughter, as joint tenants. The son built two adjoining homes on the land. He lived in one house and rented the other. The daughter lived out of the country and never visited the land. The daughter needed money, so she sold her interest in the land to her ex-boyfriend. Her ex-boyfriend immediately hired a developer to build a third home on the land. Soon after the daughter had sold her interest in the land, she was killed in a motorcycle accident. The ex-boyfriend is now asking the court for a judicial partition of the land. The son contends that upon his sister's death, he was now the sole owner of the land.
How should the court rule?
- For the ex-boyfriend, because he plans to live on the land.
- For the ex-boyfriend, because he paid for the son’s interest in the land.
- For the son, because he has the right of survivorship.
- For the son, because he has the sole position of the land.
Explanation:
Correct answer: B
Virginia Bar Exam Scoring/Grading
Admission to the Virginia Bar requires applicants to pass with a scaled score of 140 on a 200-point scale.
The VA Bar Exam is weighted as follows:
Performance on each component of the Virginia Bar Exam is measured via scaled scoring. Scaled scores are determined by a statistical method called equating to ensure fairness. For example, the exam version administered in February 2019 might be deemed more difficult than July 2022's exam version. Raw scores receive bonuses or penalties based on the relative difficulty of the exam version and are converted into scaled scores to remedy this discrepancy.
Before you can practice law in Virginia, you must also pass the Multistate Professional Responsibility Examination. The MPRE features 60 multiple-choice questions administered over two hours, and candidates must earn a scaled score of 85 or higher within two calendar years of passing the Virginia Bar Exam.
VA Bar Exam Pass Rates
75% of examinees passed the July 2023 Virginia Bar Exam and 63% passed the February 2023 exam. You’ll notice in the table below that pass rates are markedly lower for repeat takers. This phenomena likely occurs when examinees fail to change their study habits.
| Exam | First Timers | Repeaters | Overall | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Year | No Of Candidates | Pass Rate | No Of Candidates | Pass Rate | No Of Candidates | Pass Rate |
| 2022 | 558 | 78% | 169 | 50% | 727 | 72% |
| 2021 | 644 | 78% | 136 | 21% | 780 | 71% |
| 2020 | 623 | 75% | 187 | 26% | 810 | 77% |
| 2019 | 700 | 77% | 210 | 28% | 910 | 71% |
| 2018 | 801 | 70% | 303 | 25% | 1,104 | 66% |
| 2017 | 891 | 72% | 335 | 36% | 1,226 | 66% |
| 2016 | 1149 | 71% | 368 | 39% | 1,517 | 68% |
VA Bar Exam results are typically released 8-12 weeks following an exam. July 2023 results were released on October 12, 2023, and February 2023 results were released on April 14, 2023.
Virginia Bar Exam Reciprocity
Virginia has reciprocity with these jurisdictions.
Admission on Motion
Virginia allows applicants to apply for admission to the bar without taking the bar exam (admission to motion) if they:
- Have been practicing law full-time for three years leading up to their application
- Have remained in good standing
- Have been practicing in one a jurisdiction that has reciprocity with Virginia
- Pay an application fee of $2,500
Attorneys in other jurisdictions may skip the MBE component of the Virginia Bar Exam if they have passed another jurisdiction's bar exam, maintain an active license, and are in good standing in their jurisdiction. They still must pass the Virginia Essay Exam with a minimum score of 64 out of 100.
You can skip the MBE component of the Virginia Bar Exam if you have received a scaled MBE score of 133 or greater within three years preceding your exam date.
What Makes the Virginia Bar Exam Unique?
Virginia remains one of the few jurisdictions that has not adopted the Uniform Bar Exam. While its two-part exam features a UBE component (the MBE), the writing component is unique to Virginia.
Foreigners can sit for the Virginia Bar Exam if they graduate from law school, obtain an LL.M. from an ABA-accredited law school, and are admitted to practice law in the highest court of a US jurisdiction.
Contact Details of Virginia State Bar
The Virginia Board of Bar Examiners' phone lines are open from Monday until Friday from 9-12pm and 1-4pm EST.
| Virginia Board of Bar Examiners Contact Information | |
|---|---|
| Fax | (804) 367-0416 |
| Phone | (804) 367-0412 |
| Address | Virginia Board of Bar Examiners 2201 West Broad Street Suite 101 Richmond, VA 23220 |
Virginia Bar Exam FAQs
How long is the bar exam in Virginia?
Can anyone take the bar exam in Virginia?
When is the Virginia Bar Exam held?
How hard is the bar exam in Virginia?
What are Virginia bar exam application deadlines and fees?
How is the Virginia Bar Exam scored?
How to request special accommodations for the Virginia Bar Exam?
How long does it take to study for the Virginia Bar Exam?
What is the pass rate for the Virginia bar?
How many times can you take the Virginia bar exam?
Unlike most jurisdictions, Virginia has a discretionary limit of five attempts, meaning you can only sit for the VA Bar Exam four more times if you fail the bar exam the first time. That’s why it is crucial that you prepare with a comprehensive bar prep provider.
