I’m feeling petty because I hate the bar exam and don’t want to take this ridiculous, arbitrary, gatekeeping nightmare. Accordingly, here’s my running thread of typos, grammatical issues, and generally poor writing in past Michigan bar exams and examiners’ analyses.

Also, don’t @ me if I mess something up myself in this thread; I’m on Twitter and not the one obsessed with “minimal competence.”

First up is my favorite: February 2020 Explanations, p. 5. The examiners quote Crilly v. Ballou, and—somewhat miraculously given how little else I remember—I remembered the quote from Torts three years ago. You were going for “automaton,” BLE, not “automation."

We get a twofer on p. 7 of the February 2019 exam. There’s a missing common in the first highlighted part after the word “groom.” As written, the sentence implies the existence of other grooms.

There’s also a missing comma before the quote, which is syntactically independent.

February 2019’s exam has another error on p. 17. Wallace has three positions. The singular “position” is incorrect.

There’s a needless comma on p. 2 of the July 2018 exam.

There’s a similar comma issue on p. 3 of the July 2018 exam. There should be a comma before and after “Krissy” if there’s more than one neighbor; there should be no commas on either side if Krissy is the sole neighbor. Either way, this is wrong.

July 2018, p. 12. The previous sentence is framed as Daisy's argument, and it’s not clear that the last sentence isn’t. In reality, it's just a fact. This is problematic since the question asks whether summary disposition is proper—which turns on whether there's a disputed fact.

February 2018, p. 3 is debatable, but I’m gonna debate it. This is an extraordinarily bad question. How could a judge “rule on the employer’s response?” The judge would rule on the objection, not the non-objecting party’s response to it. “Your response is overruled!” is nonsense.

This dependent clause gone rogue on p. 4 of the February 2018 exam is just a mess.

I’ve read these sentences from p. 4 of the February 2018 examiners’ analyses several times, and I just cannot figure out what happened. What work is that “however” doing?! The two sentences aren’t at odds with one another. Indeed, they say the same thing!

Anyway, I’ll keep updating this over the next few days as I read more past exams. #DiplomaPrivilegeNow #MIBarExam