{"id":165836,"date":"2026-10-23T09:19:12","date_gmt":"2026-10-23T17:19:12","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/xira.com\/p\/2026\/10\/23\/hofstra-claims-it-has-no-duty-to-help-bar-examinees-suffering-cardiac-arrest\/"},"modified":"2026-10-23T09:19:12","modified_gmt":"2026-10-23T17:19:12","slug":"hofstra-claims-it-has-no-duty-to-help-bar-examinees-suffering-cardiac-arrest","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/xira.com\/p\/2026\/10\/23\/hofstra-claims-it-has-no-duty-to-help-bar-examinees-suffering-cardiac-arrest\/","title":{"rendered":"Hofstra Claims It Has No Duty To Help Bar Examinees Suffering Cardiac Arrest"},"content":{"rendered":"

On July 30, 2025, Mary Jane Jung went into cardiac arrest in the middle of the New York bar exam<\/a>. According to her complaint, she lost consciousness and turned blue in front of proctors, staff, and more than 600 other examinees. The exam kept going. According to witnesses, the test didn\u2019t stop until the scheduled lunch break<\/a>, and then resumed right on time. Jung survived, but alleges she suffered a hypoxic injury, an implanted defibrillator, ongoing memory loss, and cognitive impairment.<\/p>\n

She sued Hofstra<\/a>, where she took the exam. She also filed against the bar examiners, but that was routed to the Court of Claims as a government function. In any event, Hofstra\u2019s moving to dismiss the case on the premise that none of this should be Hofstra\u2019s problem.<\/p>\n

According to Bloomberg Law News<\/em><\/a>, the university\u2019s filing<\/a> argues that since Jung wasn\u2019t a Hofstra student, the school had no relationship with her, and that a landowner\u2019s duty to keep its property reasonably safe doesn\u2019t include a duty to provide first aid for medical emergencies that have nothing to do with the host. <\/p>\n

Hofstra hosted a test it didn\u2019t write, didn\u2019t administer, and didn\u2019t make the rules for. Venues have an obligation to make sure they don\u2019t cause anyone harm, they don\u2019t generally owe emergency medical care to every stranger that walks in.<\/p>\n

That said, Jung\u2019s complaint doesn\u2019t rest on the idea that Hofstra owed her care generally. She alleges that when Hofstra\u2019s public safety officers showed up, they \u201cfailed to promptly call emergency services, failed to promptly administer cardiopulmonary resuscitation, and failed to timely deploy an automated external defibrillator.\u201d To the extent these alleged failures stemmed from a negligent lack of training or accessibility of equipment, Jung argues that Hofstra failed to maintain a safe venue.<\/p>\n

Hofstra argues that it owed her no duty and whatever help it did provide didn\u2019t put her in a worse position. The school might not have owed her a duty, but the three specific allegations Jung makes sure seem as though they present questions of fact as to whether the school made things worse. Maybe they can win those disputes, but it should at least survive this stage of the proceedings. <\/p>\n

The case against the Board of Law Examiners raises more troubling allegations. The eyewitness accounts claimed that the folks running the bar exam discouraged others from lending assistance. In Barnes v. Dungan<\/em><\/a>, a 1999 Third Department case, a worker at an animal sanctuary had a heart attack on the job. A CPR-certified coworker offered to help and a supervisor told her not to. The worker died and the court refused to toss the case:<\/p>\n

\n

Notably, the complaint alleges that defendants affirmatively prevented Seeley, a coemployee, from administering CPR as opposed to a failure to provide or procure emergency medical assistance<\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n

Consider the machine the state built for this test of questionable value. The Board takes everyone\u2019s phones so nobody in the room can call 911, it enforces rules under which standing up is a security event, then it tells 600 people to keep their eyes on their own paper. When someone collapses, everyone\u2019s supposed to keep writing about negligence even if it requires committing it.<\/p>\n

The state made its own argument for dismissal<\/a> replete with adverbs like \u201centirely,\u201d \u201cdemonstrably,\u201d \u201cirrefutably,\u201d and \u201cbaselessly.\u201d Whenever adverbs pile up in a filing, it raises red flags as to why the author doesn\u2019t trust their claims without heaping modifiers on top. Off the top, the motion leans on video evidence that the state says disproves all the contemporaneous accounts of staff indifference. But screencaps and the state-provided timeline sure seem like questions for a fact-finder to determine down the road.<\/p>\n

Which is probably why the bulk of the filing focuses on immunity because the bar examination \u201cis a critical and quintessential governmental function.\u201d<\/p>\n

If you needed any more proof that the bar examination is a suicide pact. <\/p>\n

Earlier<\/strong>: Woman Who Went Into Cardiac Arrest During NY Bar Exam Sues Hofstra<\/a><\/p>\n

\n

\"Headshot\"Joe Patrice<\/a>\u00a0is a senior editor at Above the Law and co-host of Thinking Like A Lawyer<\/a>. Feel free to\u00a0email<\/a> any tips, questions, or comments. Follow him on\u00a0Twitter<\/a>\u00a0or Bluesky<\/a> if you\u2019re interested in law, politics, and a healthy dose of college sports news.<\/em><\/strong><\/p>\n

The post Hofstra Claims It Has No Duty To Help Bar Examinees Suffering Cardiac Arrest<\/a> appeared first on Above the Law<\/a>.<\/p>\n

On July 30, 2025, Mary Jane Jung went into cardiac arrest in the middle of the New York bar exam<\/a>. According to her complaint, she lost consciousness and turned blue in front of proctors, staff, and more than 600 other examinees. The exam kept going. According to witnesses, the test didn\u2019t stop until the scheduled lunch break<\/a>, and then resumed right on time. Jung survived, but alleges she suffered a hypoxic injury, an implanted defibrillator, ongoing memory loss, and cognitive impairment.<\/p>\n

She sued Hofstra<\/a>, where she took the exam. She also filed against the bar examiners, but that was routed to the Court of Claims as a government function. In any event, Hofstra\u2019s moving to dismiss the case on the premise that none of this should be Hofstra\u2019s problem.<\/p>\n

According to Bloomberg Law News<\/em><\/a>, the university\u2019s filing<\/a> argues that since Jung wasn\u2019t a Hofstra student, the school had no relationship with her, and that a landowner\u2019s duty to keep its property reasonably safe doesn\u2019t include a duty to provide first aid for medical emergencies that have nothing to do with the host. <\/p>\n

Hofstra hosted a test it didn\u2019t write, didn\u2019t administer, and didn\u2019t make the rules for. Venues have an obligation to make sure they don\u2019t cause anyone harm, they don\u2019t generally owe emergency medical care to every stranger that walks in.<\/p>\n

That said, Jung\u2019s complaint doesn\u2019t rest on the idea that Hofstra owed her care generally. She alleges that when Hofstra\u2019s public safety officers showed up, they \u201cfailed to promptly call emergency services, failed to promptly administer cardiopulmonary resuscitation, and failed to timely deploy an automated external defibrillator.\u201d To the extent these alleged failures stemmed from a negligent lack of training or accessibility of equipment, Jung argues that Hofstra failed to maintain a safe venue.<\/p>\n

Hofstra argues that it owed her no duty and whatever help it did provide didn\u2019t put her in a worse position. The school might not have owed her a duty, but the three specific allegations Jung makes sure seem as though they present questions of fact as to whether the school made things worse. Maybe they can win those disputes, but it should at least survive this stage of the proceedings. <\/p>\n

The case against the Board of Law Examiners raises more troubling allegations. The eyewitness accounts claimed that the folks running the bar exam discouraged others from lending assistance. In Barnes v. Dungan<\/em><\/a>, a 1999 Third Department case, a worker at an animal sanctuary had a heart attack on the job. A CPR-certified coworker offered to help and a supervisor told her not to. The worker died and the court refused to toss the case:<\/p>\n

\n

Notably, the complaint alleges that defendants affirmatively prevented Seeley, a coemployee, from administering CPR as opposed to a failure to provide or procure emergency medical assistance<\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n

Consider the machine the state built for this test of questionable value. The Board takes everyone\u2019s phones so nobody in the room can call 911, it enforces rules under which standing up is a security event, then it tells 600 people to keep their eyes on their own paper. When someone collapses, everyone\u2019s supposed to keep writing about negligence even if it requires committing it.<\/p>\n

The state made its own argument for dismissal<\/a> replete with adverbs like \u201centirely,\u201d \u201cdemonstrably,\u201d \u201cirrefutably,\u201d and \u201cbaselessly.\u201d Whenever adverbs pile up in a filing, it raises red flags as to why the author doesn\u2019t trust their claims without heaping modifiers on top. Off the top, the motion leans on video evidence that the state says disproves all the contemporaneous accounts of staff indifference. But screencaps and the state-provided timeline sure seem like questions for a fact-finder to determine down the road.<\/p>\n

Which is probably why the bulk of the filing focuses on immunity because the bar examination \u201cis a critical and quintessential governmental function.\u201d<\/p>\n

If you needed any more proof that the bar examination is a suicide pact. <\/p>\n

Earlier<\/strong>: Woman Who Went Into Cardiac Arrest During NY Bar Exam Sues Hofstra<\/a><\/p>\n

\n

\"Headshot\"Joe Patrice<\/a>\u00a0is a senior editor at Above the Law and co-host of Thinking Like A Lawyer<\/a>. Feel free to\u00a0email<\/a> any tips, questions, or comments. Follow him on\u00a0Twitter<\/a>\u00a0or Bluesky<\/a> if you\u2019re interested in law, politics, and a healthy dose of college sports news.<\/em><\/strong><\/p>\n

The post Hofstra Claims It Has No Duty To Help Bar Examinees Suffering Cardiac Arrest<\/a> appeared first on Above the Law<\/a>.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

On July 30, 2025, Mary Jane Jung went into cardiac arrest in the middle of the New York bar exam. According to her complaint, she lost consciousness and turned blue in front of proctors, staff, and more than 600 other examinees. The exam kept going. According to witnesses, the test didn\u2019t stop until the scheduled […]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":3,"featured_media":165800,"comment_status":"","ping_status":"","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_et_pb_use_builder":"","_et_pb_old_content":"","_et_gb_content_width":"","footnotes":""},"categories":[16],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-165836","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","category-above_the_law"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/xira.com\/p\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/165836","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/xira.com\/p\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/xira.com\/p\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/xira.com\/p\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/3"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/xira.com\/p\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=165836"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/xira.com\/p\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/165836\/revisions"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/xira.com\/p\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/165800"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/xira.com\/p\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=165836"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/xira.com\/p\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=165836"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/xira.com\/p\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=165836"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}