Persuasive Brief

Scope

This file covers the persuasive brief as an MPT task type: what the task asks the examinee to do, the common formats (a trial-court memorandum of law in support of or opposition to a motion, or an appellate brief), the conventional structure, the role of the standard of review in appellate briefs, and how NCBE's released point sheets grade persuasive tasks. It does not cover the other MPT task types (objective memoranda, client letters, contracts, wills, and similar) beyond noting that they exist, and it does not cover NJ-specific MPT administration logistics beyond the UBE context.

Legal Explanation

What the MPT is (NCBE/national). The Multistate Performance Test is developed by NCBE and administered by user jurisdictions as part of the bar examination; it consists of two 90-minute items, and jurisdictions that administer the Uniform Bar Examination use both items [S1]. Each item is built from a File (source documents containing all the facts of the case, beginning with a memorandum from a supervising attorney that states the specific assignment) and a Library (the legal authorities needed to complete the task) [S1][S2]. The problem is set in the fictitious state of Franklin, in the fictitious Fifteenth Circuit [S3]. The MPT is not a test of substantive law — the Library provides sufficient substantive information to complete the task [S2] — and it is graded on responsiveness to the task instructions in the first memorandum of the File, plus the content, thoroughness, and organization of the response [S3]. NCBE's instructions advise allocating approximately half of the 90 minutes to reading, digesting, and organizing before writing [S3].

What a persuasive brief asks for (NCBE/national). NCBE's list of MPT lawyering tasks includes "a persuasive memorandum or brief" alongside the objective tasks (a memorandum to a supervising attorney, a letter to a client, a statement of facts, a contract provision, a will, and others) [S2]. The defining feature of the persuasive brief is advocacy: the examinee argues for a specific result for the client, asking the court to rule in the client's favor — unlike the objective memorandum, which is conventionally described as a neutral, predictive analysis that does not take sides [S2]. The released February 2017 packet shows that contrast in the task memos: MPT-1 asked the examinee to "prepare a memorandum to me analyzing whether any potential conflicts of interest are raised," while MPT-2 (In re Guardianship of Henry King) asked for proposed Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law that "should persuade the court" that the client should be appointed guardian — the task memo expressly stated the two points the submission had to persuade the court to reach [S4]. The Library cases in MPTs "may be real, modified, or written solely for the purpose of this examination," so examinees are told to read every Library case as if it were new [S3].

Formats and structure (NCBE/national — task memo in control; section conventions are general U.S. practice). The MPT task memo controls the document requested: the assignment is stated in the first memorandum of the File, and the File may also contain office materials that dictate format, as it did in the released February 2017 persuasive task, where an office memorandum prescribed the drafting conventions the firm expected [S3][S4]. In conventional U.S. litigation practice, a persuasive brief takes one of two forms: a memorandum of law filed with a trial court in support of or in opposition to a motion, or a brief on appeal to an appellate court. The conventional skeleton of such a brief — a caption, a question presented or statement of the issues, a statement of facts crafted to favor the client, an argument organized under point headings with legal citations, and a conclusion requesting specific relief — is standard practice rather than anything NCBE's released materials mandate; and an appellate brief typically includes the applicable standard of review (for example, de novo review of legal questions, deferential review of factual findings and discretionary rulings) so the court knows how much deference to give the decision below. Because no released NCBE persuasive motion brief or appellate brief was opened in this pass to confirm those section-by-section conventions, they are described here as general practice and should be checked against a released persuasive-brief MPT (for example, the February 2018 or July 2018 packets NCBE publishes free) before being treated as MPT-specific [S2].

How the point sheet grades it (NCBE/national). NCBE publishes point sheets alongside released MPTs; the point sheets "describe the factual and legal points encompassed within the lawyering tasks to be completed" and are provided to user jurisdictions to assist graders in grading the examination [S4]. The point sheet for the released February 2017 persuasive task opens with a "Format and Overview" section and then walks through the drafter's points [S4]. Its grading guidance is revealing about what persuasive work the MPT rewards: the submission, "while drafted to favor the client, should not be explicitly argumentative"; instead the examinee should "frame and sequence" the findings and conclusions in a way that makes it most likely the judge will adopt them — setting out all relevant facts including unfavorable ones, framing unfavorable facts to minimize their effect without misstating them, and supporting legal conclusions with citations to the authorities in the Library [S4].

The 90-minute closed-universe constraint (NCBE/national). Every MPT item runs 90 minutes, and the File and Library are the entire universe of case-specific materials; examinees are told to concentrate on them, with law school learning serving only as general background [S1][S2][S3]. Because the File and Library deliberately include irrelevant facts and authorities, a core tested skill is sorting the relevant from the irrelevant under time pressure [S2].

New Jersey context (NJ-specific). New Jersey administers the Uniform Bar Examination, with a minimum passing score of 266, and has done so since the February 2017 administration, so New Jersey candidates take the MPT as part of the UBE [S5]. The MPT's weight is national: the MPT is 20% of the UBE total score, which is reported on a 400-point scale (MBE 50%, MEE 30%, MPT 20%) [S6].

Currency note (NCBE/national). Between July 2026 and July 2028, most jurisdictions will transition from the MBE, MEE, and MPT to the NextGen UBE [S2].

ELI-10: Explain It Like I'm 10

[HYPOTHETICAL — NOT A REAL CASE] Your town has one skate park, and last summer some kids broke a railing riding at night. The town board is meeting next week to decide whether to close the park at 6 p.m. or let older kids use it until 9 p.m. with a signed permission form. Your older cousin's team loves the evening session, so you help them get ready for the meeting. This is not a report — it's a pitch. The board isn't asking "what do you think will happen?" It's asking both sides to make their case and then the board will vote.

You have a folder of evidence: letters from parents, the repair bill, photos of kids wearing helmets, one complaint letter from a neighbor. And you have the park rules. Some folder stuff helps you and some hurts you — the neighbor's complaint is real and the board already knows about it, so you can't pretend it doesn't exist. Your job: build the strongest argument for the 9 p.m. session. You lead with the safety record and the permission-form plan, you put the best points first in the order that tells the best story, and when you reach the complaint letter you mention it yourself, briefly and honestly, and explain the new rule that fixes exactly that problem. You don't insult the board and you don't beg — you lay out reasons and ask for the specific thing you want: "approve the evening session with signed permission forms." Meanwhile, the kids on the other side are writing their own pitch for the 6 p.m. close, and the board will pick whichever case is more convincing.

Translating back to the real rule: you just drafted a persuasive brief [S2]. The evidence folder is the MPT File, the park rules are the Library, the town board is the judge, your cousin's instructions ("make the case for 9 p.m.") are the task memo, and the specific request at the end is the conclusion asking for relief [S1][S3][S4]. You argued for one side instead of writing a neutral, predictive analysis (the kind conventionally associated with an objective memorandum), you sequenced your points to lead the decision-maker to your outcome, you dealt honestly with the bad fact instead of hiding it, and you supported your claims with the authorities you were given — exactly what NCBE's released point sheet says persuasive MPT work rewards [S4]. And unlike the objective memorandum (a separate MPT task type), nobody asked you to be fair to both sides — in the released February 2017 packet, the objective task asked for a memorandum analyzing whether conflicts of interest were raised, while the persuasive task asked for advocacy for the client — that's what makes it persuasion [S2][S4].

Real Case Reference (if applicable)

No published judicial decision squarely addresses the persuasive brief as an MPT task type — the MPT is an exam instrument defined by NCBE's published materials, not litigated doctrine. The governing authority is NCBE's own published description of the MPT and its lawyering tasks [S1][S2], the instructions examinees receive with each MPT [S3], and the released MPTs and point sheets NCBE publishes, which show persuasive tasks in actual use [S4]. Note that the authorities inside an MPT Library — for example, In re Guardianship of Martinez (Fr. Ct. App. 2009), cited in the released February 2017 persuasive task as a model of well-drafted findings — are exam materials that "may be real, modified, or written solely for the purpose of this examination"; they are not real-world precedent and should never be cited as such [S3][S4].

Key Takeaways

• The persuasive brief is a distinct MPT task type: the examinee advocates for a specific result for the client, in contrast to the objective memorandum, which is conventionally described as neutral and predictive rather than argumentative [S2][S4].
• The task memo that opens the File controls the requested document and its format, and the File may add office conventions that dictate drafting rules — as in the released February 2017 persuasive task, where an office memorandum prescribed the format for proposed findings and conclusions [S3][S4].
• In the released point sheet, persuasive grading rewards framing and sequencing the submission so the judge is most likely to adopt it — including addressing unfavorable facts honestly but in a way that minimizes their effect — rather than explicitly argumentative language [S4].
• Like every MPT item, a persuasive brief is written in 90 minutes from the closed universe of the File and Library, in the fictitious state of Franklin, and is graded on responsiveness to the task instructions plus content, thoroughness, and organization [S1][S2][S3].
• The section-by-section conventions of conventional motion briefs and appellate briefs (caption, question presented, persuasive statement of facts, argument with point headings, conclusion, and the standard of review on appeal) are general U.S. practice; they are flagged for confirmation against a released NCBE persuasive-brief MPT rather than asserted as NCBE-documented [S2].
• NJ-specific: New Jersey administers the UBE (passing score 266, adopted with the February 2017 administration), so NJ candidates take the MPT; nationally, the MPT is 20% of the UBE total score [S5][S6].

Sources

• [S1] National Conference of Bar Examiners, "MPT (Multistate Performance Test)," https://www.ncbex.org/exams/mpt (verified 2026-08-20).
• [S2] National Conference of Bar Examiners, "Preparing for the MPT," https://www.ncbex.org/exams/mpt/preparing-mpt (verified 2026-08-20).
• [S3] National Conference of Bar Examiners, "Instructions for Taking the MPT" (PDF), https://www.ncbex.org/sites/default/files/2023-01/Instructions_MPT_2023.pdf (verified 2026-08-20).
• [S4] National Conference of Bar Examiners, "February 2017 MPTs and Point Sheets" (PDF), https://www.ncbex.org/sites/default/files/2023-03/2017-Feb-MPTs-PointSheets.pdf (verified 2026-08-20).
• [S5] New Jersey Board of Bar Examiners, "Uniform Bar Examination (UBE) Information," https://www.njbarexams.org/ube (verified 2026-08-20).
• [S6] National Conference of Bar Examiners, "UBE Bar Exam Scores," https://www.ncbex.org/exams/ube/ube-scores (verified 2026-08-20).

Not Legal Advice