NextGen UBE Measuring Foundational Skills

The NextGen UBE shifts from mere memorization to practical, integrated skills that mirror real-world lawyering. Central to this reform are the 28 tasks designed to measure foundational skills essential to effective legal practice. You will encounter many of these tasks in the actual exam, so it is important for you to understand what they test, why they matter, and how you can demonstrate competence in each area.

Task 1
Identify which legal concepts and principles are likely to affect the outcome of a matter based on the information provided. This task tests your ability to spot the key legal doctrines at play, such as negligence, breach of contract, or constitutional violations, based solely on fact patterns. It is about knowing what law matters most and why.

Task 2
Identify which facts are likely to be relevant to or dispositive of a legal issue in a matter. The task evaluates your ability to distinguish significant facts from background noise. Relevant facts affect elements of the legal claim or defense, while dispositive facts can determine the outcome.

Task 3
Identify the applicable standards of review and/or burdens of proof that will apply to legal issues in a matter. You must recognize when the applicable standard is “beyond a reasonable doubt,” “preponderance of the evidence,” or “abuse of discretion,” for example, because these control how issues are assessed by courts.

Task 4
Identify the strengths and weaknesses of a client’s position or an opposing party’s position based on the relevant legal rules and standards. This is about evaluating each side’s arguments. For example, a statute of limitations may weaken a claim, while strong evidence supporting each element of a tort might strengthen it.

Task 5
In a matter that requires additional factual development, identify which facts need to be investigated, or the best strategy for investigating or eliciting those facts, in order to be able to evaluate the strengths and weaknesses of a client’s position or an opposing party’s position based on the relevant legal rules and standards. This skill emphasizes legal strategy, requiring you to know what to ask, whom to depose, or what documents to subpoena for a better factual record.

Task 6
Assess the probable outcome of a claim, motion, discovery matter, defense, or objection based on the relevant legal rules and standards. You need to forecast likely outcomes, for example, whether a motion to dismiss will succeed, based on their understanding of the law and facts.

Task 7
Identify the applicable or dispositive language, standards, elements, or factors of a provided resource (such as a statute, contract, or judicial opinion). This task focuses on careful reading: extracting the exact parts of a statute or case that affect the matter at hand, such as a statutory definition or a contract’s termination clause.

Task 8
Identify which claims to recommend bringing, which remedies to recommend seeking, which evidence to present, which arguments or defenses to raise, or how to respond to arguments or defenses, and in a transactional matter which provisions to recommend including, based on the relevant legal rules and standards and consistent with a client’s objectives, interests, and constraints. This tests your strategic thinking and judgment: choosing what legal avenues to pursue or defend, and making those decisions in alignment with what the client wants and can accept.

Task 9
In a matter requiring review of provided materials, such as police reports, interview excerpts, or discovery, identify gaps in information obtained, suggestions for improvement, and/or grounds for objection (if applicable). You must be able to evaluate the completeness and admissibility of the materials, spotting missing information and procedural issues.

Task 10
Identify two factors that favor a client’s position or two factors that favor an opposing party’s position in a matter. This requires your ability to quickly identify favorable or unfavorable elements based on the presented facts and legal framework.

Task 11
Identify two benefits or two drawbacks of a proposed resolution of a dispute, consistent with a client’s objectives, interests, and constraints. You are assessed on your ability to weigh different resolutions, like settlements, assessing pros and cons depending on time, cost, exposure, and client goals.

Task 12
Identify potential terms of a contract or settlement agreement that could advance negotiation or resolution. You need to think like a negotiator, using language for provisions such as indemnification, confidentiality, or payment terms that support compromise.

Task 13
In a matter in which a client has multiple stated objectives, explain why a legal rule or principle, as applied to the client’s situation, may make one of those stated objectives attainable or unattainable. This task tests your understanding of the law’s limits. For instance, explaining why a complete waiver of liability might be unenforceable under state law.

Task 14
Determine the best strategy to identify the client’s needs and achieve the client’s stated goals and objectives. You must think client-centered: decide whether to litigate, negotiate, pursue ADR, or simply advise based on the client’s broader personal or business concerns.

Task 15
In a matter that requires legal research, identify the research questions that need to be answered. You should know what specific legal issues need further research, such as “Does the state recognize a duty to rescue?” or “What are the notice requirements for claiming constructive eviction?”

Task 16
Identify ambiguities in the language, standards, elements, or factors of a provided resource (such as a statute, contract, or judicial opinion). This task tests careful analysis, requiring you to spot where unclear or overly broad language could lead to differing interpretations.

Task 17
Identify efficient legal research strategies, methods, or tools (including appropriate search terms) that are likely to uncover other legal sources or documents to assist in the interpretation of a provided resource (such as a statute, contract, or judicial opinion) to advance your understanding of a client’s position. You must show you know how to research smartly: balancing keywords, using citators, or selecting the right databases to support your client’s argument.

Task 18
Given a collection of legal sources, identify the roles and characteristics of the sources, including their authoritative weight. You must distinguish between binding and persuasive authority, or between primary and secondary sources, and know where each fits in legal reasoning.

Task 19
Given one or more judicial opinions, identify the facts in a matter that are analogous to and/or distinct from the dispositive facts in the opinions. This task tests your comparing skills, requiring you to know which factual similarities and differences affect how precedent applies.

Task 20
Given a collection of legal sources, identify other sources, search terms, or research strategies that might be used to update sources or find additional sources. You must prove your ability to locate the information you need to support your legal research and analysis.

Task 21
Given a collection of legal sources, identify which sources are relevant to or dispositive of a legal issue in the matter. You must separate the important cases and statutes from the noise and choose which ones directly apply to the legal problem.

Task 22
Given a collection of legal sources, identify whether the sources are sufficient to complete an assigned research or other lawyering task. This evaluates professional judgment: knowing when you have enough to write a brief or when further research or verification is needed.

Task 23
Draft or edit correspondence to a client explaining the legal implications of a course of action, updating the client on the status of the client’s matter, and/or providing advice on the next steps to be taken in the matter. This task tests communication and requires you to write clearly, accurately, and client-centered, while avoiding jargon and addressing the client’s concerns.

Task 24
Given draft sections of a complaint or an answer to a complaint in a matter, identify language that should be changed, and make suggestions for how that language should change, consistent with the facts, the relevant legal rules and standards, and the client’s objectives, interests, and constraints. This task is about improving pleadings, including spotting errors, vague allegations, or unnecessary admissions and suggesting better phrasing.

Task 25
Given draft sections of affidavits that must be submitted to a court or other tribunal in a matter, identify the best affiant and best language to support each element to be proved, consistent with the facts, the relevant legal rules and standards, and the client’s objectives, interests, and constraints. You must decide who should testify and what they should say to support required legal elements, ensuring clarity and admissibility.

Task 26
Given draft provisions of a contract or other legal document, identify language that should be changed, explain why it should be changed, and suggest how that language should change, consistent with the facts, the relevant legal rules and standards, and the client’s objectives, interests, and constraints. This assesses your transactional drafting skills, measuring your ability to evaluating whether contract terms are clear, enforceable, and tailored to the client’s needs.

Task 27
Given a collection of legal sources, draft specified section(s) of a document, such as a memo, a persuasive brief or letter, or another common document, demonstrating skill at formulating an original legal analysis. This task requires legal writing: you must synthesize authorities, apply them to facts, and argue persuasively or objectively as appropriate.

Task 28
Draft or revise discovery documents consistent with the facts, the relevant legal rules and standards, and the client’s objectives, interests, and constraints. This task includes drafting interrogatories, requests for production, or responses. You must demonstrate your ability to phrase or challenge discovery requests strategically and ethically.