Bar exam official defends decision to continue test while woman had heart attack at Hofstra

The head of the New York State Board of Law Examiners defended last week’s decision to continue with the bar exam at Hofstra University after a test taker suffered a heart attack, saying that administrators acted appropriately, focusing on providing the victim with medical assistance and that it would not have been practical to halt the exam.

But Long Island legal experts said the incident, which occurred right before the lunch break, demonstrates the need for more defined policies on when, and under what circumstances, the exam can be halted during an emergency.

John McAlary, executive director of the Board of Law Examiners, said it's "too soon" to know if any policy changes will be implemented before the exam is administered again in February. 

"The exam concluded as our staff was obtaining medical aid for the candidate," McAlary said in a statement. "As soon as the exam ended the proctors collected the exams and the candidates were dismissed from the room so that EMTs could provide the needed medical care to the candidate ... The Board is gathering information, including which candidates may have been impacted by the event, and it will carefully review the information and will formulate an appropriate response in due course."

In an interview, McAlary said while it's not uncommon for an individual to fall ill during the exam, last week's incident, which occurred about 10 minutes before the lunch break for the more than 800 test takers, was the most serious in his 20-year career.

And while McAlary said there are procedures in place for incidents such as a fire in the exam room, the test has never been halted for a medical incident during his tenure with the board.

"Our exam managers did what they were supposed to do. They assessed the situation and immediately realized that the person was in need of medical care," he said. "University security promptly provided emergency care until the paramedics arrived. So before a decision could be made whether to stop the exam, it ended. ... Just because somebody becomes sick doesn't mean that we stop the clock. In most instances, the person who becomes ill does not require medical assistance. This was a highly unusual situation."

The episode occurred on July 30 on the second day of the state Bar Examination at Hofstra’s David S. Mack Sports and Exhibition Complex, when a yet unidentified Fordham Law School student collapsed. 

Within moments, Hofstra public safety officials rushed into the gymnasium, administering chest compressions and applying an automated external defibrillator, used to revive individuals from cardiac arrest, university spokeswoman Terry Coniglio said. The woman was taken by ambulance to Nassau University Medical Center where sources said she survived.

The New York State Board of Law Examiners, Coniglio said, rents space for the exam and Hofstra was not involved in the decision to keep going with the test.

The New York State Board of Law Examiners, she said, rents space for the exam and Hofstra was not involved in the decision to keep going with the test.

As first responders tried to revive the woman, the exam, which is required before an individual can become a practicing attorney, continued uninterrupted. Students returned to complete the exam after an abbreviated lunch break.

A proctor who was in the room at the time of the incident told Newsday he had no power to halt the exam and that only the administrator has that authority.

The proctor, who asked that his name not be used so he could speak freely about the incident, said there was no discussion about halting the exam although in hindsight, he believes the situation could have been handled differently.

"Proctors could have collected the exams and then given them back to them or they could have delayed the start of the p.m. part of the exam," he said. "There were also proctors who were retired, or are first responders. Maybe they could ask beforehand who is capable of doing something in the case of an emergency."

Proctors, who are paid $20 per hour, observe the applicants taking the exam to ensure there is no cheating.

In the aftermath of the incident, dozens of test takers took to Reddit, an online message board, to criticize the refusal to stop the test, with many saying that it was impossible to concentrate during a life-and-death moment.

Legal experts said there's no easy answers but that transparent policies are needed to ensure there's no confusion during future exams.

"There needs to be policies and procedures in place for the proctors, so that they're better equipped to handle a situation like that," said James P. Joseph, president of Nassau County Bar Association. "I don't think it's fair to the proctors, nor obviously to the students taking the exam, to not know how they're supposed to handle a situation like that."

The passage rate of the 12-hour, two-day test when the exam was last administered in New York in February was 77%, records show.

Cara Dagostino, assistant dean for academic excellence and bar success and an assistant law professor at the Touro Law Center, said while the bar requires months of preparation and sacrifice, last week's incident raises questions if the exam process itself may be too rigid and inflexible.

"The fact that we’re even asking whether an exam could pause while someone is receiving lifesaving care shows how much weight this test carries," Dagostino said. "Yes, these are future attorneys trained to think critically under pressure. In that moment, they were also individuals navigating a deeply emotional and unexpected situation, and I do think it’s fair to ask whether we’ve built enough flexibility into a system where so much hinges on a few hours over two days."

By Robert Brodsky

robert.brodsky@newsday.com@BrodskyRobert

Robert Brodsky is a breaking news reporter who has worked at Newsday since 2011. He is a Queens College and American University alum.