BarBri Thread: People taking Barbri for July 2013 exam

(Study Tips, Dealing With Stress, Maintaining a Social Life, Financial Aid, Internships, Bar Exam, Careers in Law . . . )
huckabees
Posts: 322
Joined: Mon Jun 16, 2008 11:38 pm

Re: BarBri Thread: People taking Barbri for July 2013 exam

Postby huckabees » Wed Jun 26, 2013 7:16 am

Sorry to hijack(ish), and sorry if this was covered several pages ago, but can people comment on the utility of watching the essay-related videos? Both the "how to" videos for the subjects, as well as the essay post-mortems (I've actually heard decent things about these, because they supposedly tell you what the "main" issues are, which the essay review book does not).

Am behind and need to cut somewhere, but don't know if this is the place to do it. Taking the CA bar, FWIW. Thanks!

cpajd
Posts: 44
Joined: Sat Apr 16, 2011 9:40 am

Re: BarBri Thread: People taking Barbri for July 2013 exam

Postby cpajd » Wed Jun 26, 2013 7:25 am

huckabees wrote:Sorry to hijack(ish), and sorry if this was covered several pages ago, but can people comment on the utility of watching the essay-related videos? Both the "how to" videos for the subjects, as well as the essay post-mortems (I've actually heard decent things about these, because they supposedly tell you what the "main" issues are, which the essay review book does not).

Am behind and need to cut somewhere, but don't know if this is the place to do it. Taking the CA bar, FWIW. Thanks!



Interested as well. I've intentionally been focused on going over the CMR and doing practice MBEs, and so I've been blowing off the essay stuff-- although yesterday I was intentional about reading a few essay questions and outlining. I've watched one essay advantage video and read over some sample essays with answers, but I still feel like I need to know the black letter better. I think I may skip all those videos and just try to read a lot of sample essays and try to outline for most. Poor approach, maybe....

bree
Posts: 41
Joined: Tue May 19, 2009 7:49 pm

Re: BarBri Thread: People taking Barbri for July 2013 exam

Postby bree » Wed Jun 26, 2013 7:53 am

AMCD wrote:Thank you Nevdash, now I can print that wretched outline off!

Hey, anyone see the bar guru's predictions for the July 2013 essays. He was 5 out of 6 right for February! If anyone wants me to post his predictions I will, but they are depressing, so don't want to do it in case it might push anyone over the edge!!


Yeah, I can't find these predictions either. Could you post?

Thanks

User avatar
englawyer
Posts: 1270
Joined: Wed Feb 14, 2007 10:57 pm

Re: BarBri Thread: People taking Barbri for July 2013 exam

Postby englawyer » Wed Jun 26, 2013 8:15 am

nyt essay 30:

"bylaws were amended to provide for a 2/3 vote for any future amendment"
....
"X moved for the adoption of a resolution to increase the number of directors from 4 to 5 which passed with 55% of the shareholder vote"


the answer key barrels through the first amendment and says that the resolution was successful due to the majority. is there a rule against S/H changing the percentage required for passing future amendments? the answer references something like "absent a provision contrary in the certificate, the # of directors authorized can be amended by a majority vote of the s/h". i guess the implication is that a provision in the bylaws is not valid, but a provision in the certificate is?

seems kind of formalistic because S/H can vote to amend the certificate to accomplish the same change...and i didn't see anything about this in the CMR (although i might have missed something).

User avatar
Unitas
Posts: 1387
Joined: Wed Sep 02, 2009 7:03 pm

Re: BarBri Thread: People taking Barbri for July 2013 exam

Postby Unitas » Wed Jun 26, 2013 8:29 am

englawyer wrote:nyt essay 30:

"bylaws were amended to provide for a 2/3 vote for any future amendment"
....
"X moved for the adoption of a resolution to increase the number of directors from 4 to 5 which passed with 55% of the shareholder vote"


the answer key barrels through the first amendment and says that the resolution was successful due to the majority. is there a rule against S/H changing the percentage required for passing future amendments? the answer references something like "absent a provision contrary in the certificate, the # of directors authorized can be amended by a majority vote of the s/h". i guess the implication is that a provision in the bylaws is not valid, but a provision in the certificate is?

seems kind of formalistic because S/H can vote to amend the certificate to accomplish the same change...and i didn't see anything about this in the CMR (although i might have missed something).


Page 45 of the handout:
To impose a super majority it must be in the certificate, not bylaws. This is true for both director and shareholder voting.
(I got the question wrong too. I discussed whether a vote pursuant to a void director voting agreement was valid.)

Also, a bylaw amendment, shareholder act, or the board (if a shareholder bylaw allows it) can increase the number of director positions.

AMCD
Posts: 129
Joined: Sat May 14, 2011 11:33 pm

Re: BarBri Thread: People taking Barbri for July 2013 exam

Postby AMCD » Wed Jun 26, 2013 3:33 pm

PREDICTIONS:

Here they are, and they suck!!
Con Law
California Evidence
Wills/Trusts/Estates--Community Property
Straight PR or Cross-over
Contracts/Remedies Cross-over
Real Property


Wild Card: California Civ. Pro. but Civ. Pro. regardless ie: Civ. Pro in general a wild card

He predicted 5/6 for February.

User avatar
daphne
Posts: 36
Joined: Wed Jun 26, 2013 4:00 pm

Re: BarBri Thread: People taking Barbri for July 2013 exam

Postby daphne » Wed Jun 26, 2013 4:05 pm

NY Essay 2


When I did this practice, I didn't think about the amount of consideration problems. (The question is about the issuance of stock) In the sample answer, they provide also this one as a potential claim (Whether the consideration amount for the land is sufficient) and then said it cannot prevail because this stock does not have par value.
I am a little confused. Whether do we need to raise a potential claim and then said it is not possible??

User avatar
daphne
Posts: 36
Joined: Wed Jun 26, 2013 4:00 pm

Re: BarBri Thread: People taking Barbri for July 2013 exam

Postby daphne » Wed Jun 26, 2013 4:06 pm

bgdddymtty wrote:
BCLS wrote:Can anyone explain Contract Set 5 # 15? I can't wrap my head around this one. How is the K not unilateral when the contractor used the bid?
First things first: the eventual contract for the plumbing work will be bilateral, not unilateral. It's not going to be a case where the contractor simply tells the plumber that if he happens to show up and complete the work, the contractor will play him. The contractor will need more certainty than that, so both he and the plumber will contract to perform--the plumber working, the contractor paying. Unlike in a unilateral contract setting, the plumber won't have the option of just not showing up or of starting the work and then stopping.

What is unilateral is the contractor's option to accept the plumber's bid. Normally, an offer can be rescinded at any time, but in the case of contracting that would be unworkable. When a potential subcontractor sends in a bid to a potential general contractor, the sub knows that the GC has to rely on the sub's bid in making his own bid. Thus, even though the GC doesn't pay consideration, he gets an option to accept within a reasonable time after the bid process is complete.

In this case, the contractor had not yet exercised his option, and his statement that he would just forget that the plumber had ever submitted the bid operated to rescind the option contract.


I have been struggling with this question too. Your explanation does help a lot!

User avatar
zeth006
Posts: 1167
Joined: Tue May 12, 2009 2:54 am

Re: BarBri Thread: People taking Barbri for July 2013 exam

Postby zeth006 » Wed Jun 26, 2013 4:16 pm

AMCD wrote:PREDICTIONS:

Here they are, and they suck!!
Con Law
California Evidence
Wills/Trusts/Estates--Community Property
Straight PR or Cross-over
Contracts/Remedies Cross-over
Real Property


Wild Card: California Civ. Pro. but Civ. Pro. regardless ie: Civ. Pro in general a wild card

He predicted 5/6 for February.



Contracts/remedies I think I can live with. Not my best subjects, but most def not my worst.

Cal Civ Pro will just need a little more memorization. Might have to print out the comparative charts.

Now con law and real property........ :(


I did horribly on the real property MBEs and essays. Con law I barely squeaked by using common sense for half the questions I even got right.

User avatar
tfer2222
Posts: 357
Joined: Fri Jun 24, 2011 9:20 pm

Re: BarBri Thread: People taking Barbri for July 2013 exam

Postby tfer2222 » Wed Jun 26, 2013 4:27 pm

daphne wrote:NY Essay 2


When I did this practice, I didn't think about the amount of consideration problems. (The question is about the issuance of stock) In the sample answer, they provide also this one as a potential claim (Whether the consideration amount for the land is sufficient) and then said it cannot prevail because this stock does not have par value.
I am a little confused. Whether do we need to raise a potential claim and then said it is not possible??


this has annoyed me for a while. The Barbri answers often seem to include things they have explicitly told us to avoid putting in our answers. However, i think they sometimes include this stuff just to educate/remind us a little more on the law, not necessarily to tell us that it definitely should have been in our answer (even though they allocate it points).

Either way its just annoying.

AMCD
Posts: 129
Joined: Sat May 14, 2011 11:33 pm

Re: BarBri Thread: People taking Barbri for July 2013 exam

Postby AMCD » Wed Jun 26, 2013 4:30 pm

zeth006 wrote:
AMCD wrote:PREDICTIONS:

Here they are, and they suck!!
Con Law
California Evidence
Wills/Trusts/Estates--Community Property
Straight PR or Cross-over
Contracts/Remedies Cross-over
Real Property


Wild Card: California Civ. Pro. but Civ. Pro. regardless ie: Civ. Pro in general a wild card

He predicted 5/6 for February.


They have not done straight property for a while, and they love all that morgage and foreclosure crap. So in the moment in terms of subject matter.

California evidence. Ugh. Con law is going to be a 1st Am. issue or commerce clause I'd guess.

I was hoping for crim., or torts, but both were heavily covered in February with torts twice where it was also in a torts-remedies question.

Contracts/remedies I think I can live with. Not my best subjects, but most def not my worst.

Cal Civ Pro will just need a little more memorization. Might have to print out the comparative charts.

Now con law and real property........ :(


I did horribly on the real property MBEs and essays. Con law I barely squeaked by using common sense for half the questions I even got right.

User avatar
zeth006
Posts: 1167
Joined: Tue May 12, 2009 2:54 am

Re: BarBri Thread: People taking Barbri for July 2013 exam

Postby zeth006 » Wed Jun 26, 2013 4:42 pm

AMCD, think you misquoted me, haha!


And yeah...I was hoping for crim and torts too! Those two subjects IMO are the most linear out of all the others I've gotten lectures for. Real pity.

Are mortgages and foreclosures really covered often? The essay dude said landlord/tenant stuff gets covered 1/3 of the time when property comes up. Really hoping we don't get mortgages/foreclosures. So much to parse through.

Foosters Galore
Posts: 305
Joined: Wed Dec 09, 2009 5:15 pm

Re: BarBri Thread: People taking Barbri for July 2013 exam

Postby Foosters Galore » Wed Jun 26, 2013 5:23 pm

AMCD wrote:PREDICTIONS:

Here they are, and they suck!!
Con Law
California Evidence
Wills/Trusts/Estates--Community Property
Straight PR or Cross-over
Contracts/Remedies Cross-over
Real Property


Wild Card: California Civ. Pro. but Civ. Pro. regardless ie: Civ. Pro in general a wild card

He predicted 5/6 for February.


Weren't both PR and Cal Evidence covered on the February bar? Is it likely we'll get them both on the next go round?

AMCD
Posts: 129
Joined: Sat May 14, 2011 11:33 pm

Re: BarBri Thread: People taking Barbri for July 2013 exam

Postby AMCD » Wed Jun 26, 2013 5:55 pm

Sorry for the misquotation earlier!!

No, evidence was not tested, nor con. law nor property or community property. PR is always a favorite and most likely to appear with or without a crossover. Just an important thing to the examiners it seems, because apparently the MPRE doesn't give a realistic sense of our sincerity!

c3pO4
Posts: 835
Joined: Wed Oct 19, 2011 1:34 pm

Re: BarBri Thread: People taking Barbri for July 2013 exam

Postby c3pO4 » Wed Jun 26, 2013 6:10 pm

AMCD wrote:Sorry for the misquotation earlier!!

No, evidence was not tested, nor con. law nor property or community property. PR is always a favorite and most likely to appear with or without a crossover. Just an important thing to the examiners it seems, because apparently the MPRE doesn't give a realistic sense of our sincerity!


the PR lecturer says CA is required to test it every time. i thought they did test CA civpro and CA evidence in febr? is this wrong?

AMCD
Posts: 129
Joined: Sat May 14, 2011 11:33 pm

Re: BarBri Thread: People taking Barbri for July 2013 exam

Postby AMCD » Wed Jun 26, 2013 6:29 pm

Interesting, didn't know they have to test it. Have not had the PR lecture yet.

The Feb bar was as follows:
Crimes
Straight PR
Torts
Tort Remedies
Civ Pro (Not CA specific)
Business Associations

bdepeyster
Posts: 14
Joined: Tue Jan 05, 2010 7:32 pm

Re: BarBri Thread: People taking Barbri for July 2013 exam

Postby bdepeyster » Wed Jun 26, 2013 7:52 pm

IMO property essays are much more straight forward than property MBEs.

Record your goddamned mortgages/notes/encumbrances/conveyances JFC.

BlameTrain
Posts: 11
Joined: Fri May 17, 2013 10:28 am

Re: BarBri Thread: People taking Barbri for July 2013 exam

Postby BlameTrain » Wed Jun 26, 2013 10:44 pm

Just wanted to ask a general question if people have largely abandoned the CMR when they are reviewing only consulting it on areas that they are weak on or came up in the questions that were not covered in the lecture? I started studying almost exclusively from the outlines supplemented by whatever margin notes I take, but occasionally the lecturer will say something along the lines of "to enhance your CMR readings." Just wanted to see if everyone was really relying on it primarily and their notes secondarily.

User avatar
5ky
Posts: 6367
Joined: Mon Oct 05, 2009 4:10 pm

Re: BarBri Thread: People taking Barbri for July 2013 exam

Postby 5ky » Wed Jun 26, 2013 10:57 pm

BlameTrain wrote:Just wanted to ask a general question if people have largely abandoned the CMR when they are reviewing only consulting it on areas that they are weak on or came up in the questions that were not covered in the lecture? I started studying almost exclusively from the outlines supplemented by whatever margin notes I take, but occasionally the lecturer will say something along the lines of "to enhance your CMR readings." Just wanted to see if everyone was really relying on it primarily and their notes secondarily.


I am pretty familiar with it for Torts and Con Law, but I have barely cracked it for the other subjects.

User avatar
daphne
Posts: 36
Joined: Wed Jun 26, 2013 4:00 pm

Re: BarBri Thread: People taking Barbri for July 2013 exam

Postby daphne » Wed Jun 26, 2013 10:57 pm

tfer2222 wrote:
daphne wrote:NY Essay 2


When I did this practice, I didn't think about the amount of consideration problems. (The question is about the issuance of stock) In the sample answer, they provide also this one as a potential claim (Whether the consideration amount for the land is sufficient) and then said it cannot prevail because this stock does not have par value.
I am a little confused. Whether do we need to raise a potential claim and then said it is not possible??


this has annoyed me for a while. The Barbri answers often seem to include things they have explicitly told us to avoid putting in our answers. However, i think they sometimes include this stuff just to educate/remind us a little more on the law, not necessarily to tell us that it definitely should have been in our answer (even though they allocate it points).

Either way its just annoying.


Can't agree anymore about the annoying ....... But your point regarding reminding us more makes sense and is a better way for me to understand the sample answer.

c3pO4
Posts: 835
Joined: Wed Oct 19, 2011 1:34 pm

Re: BarBri Thread: People taking Barbri for July 2013 exam

Postby c3pO4 » Thu Jun 27, 2013 2:42 am

5ky wrote:
BlameTrain wrote:Just wanted to ask a general question if people have largely abandoned the CMR when they are reviewing only consulting it on areas that they are weak on or came up in the questions that were not covered in the lecture? I started studying almost exclusively from the outlines supplemented by whatever margin notes I take, but occasionally the lecturer will say something along the lines of "to enhance your CMR readings." Just wanted to see if everyone was really relying on it primarily and their notes secondarily.


I am pretty familiar with it for Torts and Con Law, but I have barely cracked it for the other subjects.


I think most of the profs try to uspply everything we need in their lecture handouts and some even explicitly say we can review frmo the handout and ignore the CMR. I find that reading the cmr / skimming it in rotation with the lecture handout is helpful to memorize because if i keep looking at the same lecture handout my eyes glaze over, but it's not my primary source and i haven't looked at it in depth on every subject.

Nynaeve
Posts: 43
Joined: Wed Aug 15, 2012 11:08 am

Re: BarBri Thread: People taking Barbri for July 2013 exam

Postby Nynaeve » Thu Jun 27, 2013 9:53 am

Anyone else's MPT answer not resemble that Barbri model answer? Yikes.

User avatar
daphne
Posts: 36
Joined: Wed Jun 26, 2013 4:00 pm

Re: BarBri Thread: People taking Barbri for July 2013 exam

Postby daphne » Thu Jun 27, 2013 12:16 pm

Nynaeve wrote:Anyone else's MPT answer not resemble that Barbri model answer? Yikes.




I found this MPT easy until I saw the sample answer. It is much longer and detailed than I thought......
My breach element is different from theirs. I choose 1) defect has an impact on the safety and health (Because the case law mentioned that in determing whether there has been a breach...court should inquiry whether the claimed defect has an impact....) 2) notice 3) reasonable time for correction.
I understand they include the element of the existence of lease, but I don't quite understand the relationship between "fit for human habitation" and "subject to conditions that are dangerous..."
Actually, why I felt this one hard is that after I saw the model answer, I found most evidence for the elements are overlapping and just repeating again and again. Like the evidence for dangerous condition and the evidence to show the extent or period of the defect (in remedy).
I don't know whether I am the only one who has this feeling.

By the way, how many words do you usually write for MPT? I can't imagine I can write a 8 pages answer in 90 minutes....

User avatar
Unitas
Posts: 1387
Joined: Wed Sep 02, 2009 7:03 pm

Re: BarBri Thread: People taking Barbri for July 2013 exam

Postby Unitas » Thu Jun 27, 2013 12:22 pm

daphne wrote:
Nynaeve wrote:Anyone else's MPT answer not resemble that Barbri model answer? Yikes.




I found this MPT easy until I saw the sample answer. It is much longer and detailed than I thought......
My breach element is different from theirs. I choose 1) defect has an impact on the safety and health (Because the case law mentioned that in determing whether there has been a breach...court should inquiry whether the claimed defect has an impact....) 2) notice 3) reasonable time for correction.
I understand they include the element of the existence of lease, but I don't quite understand the relationship between "fit for human habitation" and "subject to conditions that are dangerous..."
Actually, why I felt this one hard is that after I saw the model answer, I found most evidence for the elements are overlapping and just repeating again and again. Like the evidence for dangerous condition and the evidence to show the extent or period of the defect (in remedy).
I don't know whether I am the only one who has this feeling.

By the way, how many words do you usually write for MPT? I can't imagine I can write a 8 pages answer in 90 minutes....


Those were my three elements also. I included a caveat that it isn't clear if elements 2 and 3 are only necessary to bring an IWH claim or necessary when using it as a defense in a landlord's claim. I don't think it was clear anywhere in the MPT, but I could be wrong.

My damages section was also a lot different than the model answer. My heading was Remedies then stated each remedy where the element section usually goes with a quick explanation of the remedy then discussed evidence to prove it and what additional evidence was needed (receipts and so forth).

My third section was similar.

The worst part of this MPT for me was the fact it was not clear when notice was given of each deficiency and that threw me off on how to analyze the issues, because all analysis was contingent on that.

That model answer was insane in its length and detail. I am dreading seeing my grade.

User avatar
5ky
Posts: 6367
Joined: Mon Oct 05, 2009 4:10 pm

Re: BarBri Thread: People taking Barbri for July 2013 exam

Postby 5ky » Thu Jun 27, 2013 2:07 pm

I also used those three elements. I also quit after doing that first part, and didn't do any of the damages stuff, so I won't see what grade i get or anything




Return to “Forum for Law School Students”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 4 guests