California 2025 Bar Exam Vendor Hid Its Doubts, Suit Says (1)

New internal documents show the contractor whose software failed during California’s February 2025 bar exam knew it couldn’t deliver on its promise to smoothly administer the test, the state bar said in a beefed-up lawsuit against Meazure Learning.

Meazure employees shared doubts with executives as early as September 2024 about the company’s ability to administer the two-day exam, said the amended complaint filed Wednesday in California Superior Court, Los Angeles County. And Meazure withheld detailed data about users’ trouble accessing the testing platform during a November 2024 test-run of the exam, which the bar said covered up the extent of issues and left it “unable to course-correct” before the February test.

Sometimes, Meazure employees blamed problems with the exam on test-takers, the filing said.

“Contemporaneous, internal communications among Meazure employees (which were not disclosed to the State Bar until discovery in this case) confirmed what was obvious: Meazure had been misrepresenting its capabilities for months, and its platform had predictably failed in catastrophic fashion,” the complaint said.

Specific quotes from internal documents are redacted, though an unredacted version of the complaint against ProctorU Inc., which does business as Meazure Learning, has been filed conditionally under seal. The state bar in a Wednesday news release said it will challenge Meazure’s designation of the communications as “confidential.”

“Meazure Learning promised the State Bar that it could deliver a seamless exam experience, all while knowing it was not up to the job,” said State Bar Board of Trustees Chair José Cisneros. “By this amended complaint, the State Bar advances its efforts to hold them accountable.”

The company’s concerns leading up to the exam appear focused on its overall technological capacity to run the exam and its trouble staffing proctors, which the bar said caused scheduling issues and a crunch assigning applicants who had opted to take the test remotely to in-person testing centers.

“With a disastrous administration of the February 2025 Bar Exam all but assured, Meazure wasn’t worried about how it had shirked its contractual duties and misrepresented itself to the State Bar,” the complaint said. “Nor was Meazure worried about the thousands of test takers depending on it to competently administer the most important exam of their lives. Meazure was worried about itself.”

A Meazure spokesperson said the bar is using the lawsuit to try to “shift the blame for its flawed development process for the February 2025 exam.”

“We proudly stand behind our track record of reliably administering over 4 million exams annually and supporting more than 1,000 organizations across industries over the course of our more than 20 years in the testing industry,” the spokesperson said. “We recognize the importance of a smooth exam experience, and we regret that some test takers had issues during the February 2025 California Bar Exam.”

‘Unable to Course Correct’

The bar’s attempt at launching a brand-new exam in February 2025 resulted in widespread technical issues on test day, with many applicants saying they were prevented from finishing the test, and months of turmoil for the agency as revelations surfaced, including that a bar contractor used OpenAI’s ChatGPT to generate dozens of the test’s multiple-choice questions.

The bar, now under new leadership, is painstakingly considering whether it should adopt the National Conference of Bar Examiners’ new NextGen exam after its current test phases out in February 2028, or whether it should try again to test prospective attorneys using its own exam. A new state law passed in the wake of the February test requires that the format of the next test get California Supreme Court approval by July.

Test takers were flagging problems with the February exam well ahead of its administration.

After test takers had trouble accessing Meazure’s platform during a November 2024 test-run, the platform told the bar the trouble would be fixed by communicating with test takers and clarifying which computers would be compatible with the interface, the filing said.

But Meazure declined to send the bar login data that would provide complete information on what happened, instead providing high-level summaries. At first, Meazure falsely told the agency the data wasn’t available, the complaint said.

“Meazure’s deception and delay tactics did not just violate the parties’ contracts,” the complaint said. “They concealed the true nature and extent of the issues that arose during the November 2024 study and left the State Bar unable to course correct before the February 2025 Bar Exam.”

Because of proctoring issues, many applicants who intended to test remotely were shifted to in-person centers, despite Meazure’s lack of testing locations within 50 miles of test-takers’ homes. The squeeze forced the bar to get more centers in Fresno and Bakersfield and run exams in its Los Angeles office, the filing said.

A week after a September Committee of Bar Examiners meeting, Meazure employees discussed the bar’s petition to the California Supreme Court, raising internal alarms that the petition said the company represented it could operate a two-day test, which employees doubted. Meazure didn’t share its concerns with the bar, the filing said.

The bar first sued ProctorU, Inc in May 2025. The bar said that Meazure was clearly unable to handle the administration despite representing for months that it would deliver a seamless testing experience, but that it was dodging requests for information.

Litigation against ProctorU filed by bar exam takers is also pending in Northern California federal court.

Meazure didn’t immediately respond to a request for comment.

The state bar is represented by its Office of General Counsel and Hueston Hennigan LLP. Esbrook PC and Potomac Law Group PLLC represent ProctorU Inc.

The case is State Bar of California v. ProctorU, Inc., Cal. Super. Ct., No. 25STCV13089, 3/11/26.