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 . . . )
goodolgil
Posts: 923
Joined: Sat May 16, 2009 6:01 pm

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

Postby goodolgil » Tue Jul 09, 2013 7:35 pm

LOL @ the simulated MBE question that required a deducement that some grandson was in gestation (and thus eligible for a class gift) because he was born six months later.

BarBri: never not hiding the ball.

User avatar
5ky
Posts: 6392
Joined: Mon Oct 05, 2009 4:10 pm

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

Postby 5ky » Tue Jul 09, 2013 7:37 pm

goodolgil wrote:LOL @ the simulated MBE question that required a deducement that some grandson was in gestation (and thus eligible for a class gift) because he was born six months later.

BarBri: never not hiding the ball.


if you had franceze, she definitely covered that in lecture specifically, so i can't hate too much for that question.

hds2388
Posts: 206
Joined: Tue Aug 04, 2009 4:07 pm

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

Postby hds2388 » Tue Jul 09, 2013 7:38 pm

5ky wrote:
goodolgil wrote:LOL @ the simulated MBE question that required a deducement that some grandson was in gestation (and thus eligible for a class gift) because he was born six months later.

BarBri: never not hiding the ball.


if you had franceze, she definitely covered that in lecture specifically, so i can't hate too much for that question.


#wombrule

kaiser
Posts: 2940
Joined: Mon May 09, 2011 11:34 pm

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

Postby kaiser » Tue Jul 09, 2013 7:42 pm

^^^

Can't complain about any 1 property Q (aside from the metes and bounds geometry one), since my overall property score was so low. I got 19 property questions wrong, which was almost exactly 1/3 of all my errors on the test. I need to shore that up real bad.

goodolgil
Posts: 923
Joined: Sat May 16, 2009 6:01 pm

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

Postby goodolgil » Tue Jul 09, 2013 7:47 pm

hds2388 wrote:
5ky wrote:
goodolgil wrote:LOL @ the simulated MBE question that required a deducement that some grandson was in gestation (and thus eligible for a class gift) because he was born six months later.

BarBri: never not hiding the ball.


if you had franceze, she definitely covered that in lecture specifically, so i can't hate too much for that question.


#wombrule


I'm more bitching about having to make the connection that since the baby was born six months later, it had to be in gestation when the person died. But yeah, maybe it's obvious to most people. Also, kinda forgot the details of the question so maybe I'm missing a detail that made the question more obvious.

hds2388
Posts: 206
Joined: Tue Aug 04, 2009 4:07 pm

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

Postby hds2388 » Tue Jul 09, 2013 7:51 pm

goodolgil wrote:
hds2388 wrote:
5ky wrote:
goodolgil wrote:LOL @ the simulated MBE question that required a deducement that some grandson was in gestation (and thus eligible for a class gift) because he was born six months later.

BarBri: never not hiding the ball.


if you had franceze, she definitely covered that in lecture specifically, so i can't hate too much for that question.


#wombrule


I'm more bitching about having to make the connection that since the baby was born six months later, it had to be in gestation when the person died. But yeah, maybe it's obvious to most people. Also, kinda forgot the details of the question so maybe I'm missing a detail that made the question more obvious.


Haha I completely agree, it wasn't obvious at all. I just thought it was funny that the rule actually got tested. I also think it has a funny name.

User avatar
jawsthegreat
Posts: 792
Joined: Wed Dec 03, 2008 10:51 pm

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

Postby jawsthegreat » Tue Jul 09, 2013 10:20 pm

5ky wrote:I'd think the sample size from wave 1 and then especially with wave 2 would be big enough that a large part of it would be based on this years' students.

And aside from the few schools like Stanford that have june graduations, I think almost every school is on the same schedule for a state like NY


Spoiler alert: the practice exam is the exact same one they've been using for years. They can probably estimate it based on years of data.

User avatar
jawsthegreat
Posts: 792
Joined: Wed Dec 03, 2008 10:51 pm

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

Postby jawsthegreat » Tue Jul 09, 2013 10:22 pm

jawsthegreat wrote:
5ky wrote:I'd think the sample size from wave 1 and then especially with wave 2 would be big enough that a large part of it would be based on this years' students.

And aside from the few schools like Stanford that have june graduations, I think almost every school is on the same schedule for a state like NY


Spoiler alert: the practice exam is the exact same one they've been using for years. They can probably estimate it based on years of data.



If you don't believe me just read this thread from 2007, they're talking about the same absurd questions we are. Even the question about the messed up property deed(185 or186)

User avatar
5ky
Posts: 6392
Joined: Mon Oct 05, 2009 4:10 pm

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

Postby 5ky » Tue Jul 09, 2013 10:31 pm

jawsthegreat wrote:
jawsthegreat wrote:
5ky wrote:I'd think the sample size from wave 1 and then especially with wave 2 would be big enough that a large part of it would be based on this years' students.

And aside from the few schools like Stanford that have june graduations, I think almost every school is on the same schedule for a state like NY


Spoiler alert: the practice exam is the exact same one they've been using for years. They can probably estimate it based on years of data.



If you don't believe me just read this thread from 2007, they're talking about the same absurd questions we are. Even the question about the messed up property deed(185 or186)


no, that makes perfect sense to me. bj was just saying he wanted to be curved against students in this cycle, not previous ones.

Green Crayons
Posts: 123
Joined: Mon Jun 08, 2009 2:08 pm

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

Postby Green Crayons » Wed Jul 10, 2013 12:01 pm

Hey folks a "forced abortion, forced adoption" legislative enactment doesn't present a substantial federal question, right?

User avatar
Tangerine Gleam
Posts: 1349
Joined: Wed Jul 01, 2009 4:50 pm

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

Postby Tangerine Gleam » Wed Jul 10, 2013 12:15 pm

Green Crayons wrote:Hey folks a "forced abortion, forced adoption" legislative enactment doesn't present a substantial federal question, right?


It definitely does. That raises big constitutional issues.

Stinson
Posts: 257
Joined: Tue Mar 23, 2010 12:01 am

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

Postby Stinson » Wed Jul 10, 2013 12:22 pm

goodolgil wrote:LOL @ the simulated MBE question that required a deducement that some grandson was in gestation (and thus eligible for a class gift) because he was born six months later.

BarBri: never not hiding the ball.


Just to hate on Barbri a little more, I asked my fiancee who had just completed her OB/Gyn rotation whether it was possible to be born after fewer than six months in gestation and survive, and apparently it is possible, albeit unlikely, with proper postnatal care. Wikipedia confirms that babies born at 23 weeks, or about five months and ten days, have about a 20% chance to survive. So the child born six months later may not have been in gestation just because he was born six months later. Ha Barbri, we win.

Now about that fixtures question...

User avatar
bgdddymtty
Posts: 697
Joined: Thu Feb 11, 2010 12:59 pm

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

Postby bgdddymtty » Wed Jul 10, 2013 12:33 pm

Stinson wrote:
goodolgil wrote:LOL @ the simulated MBE question that required a deducement that some grandson was in gestation (and thus eligible for a class gift) because he was born six months later.

BarBri: never not hiding the ball.


Just to hate on Barbri a little more, I asked my fiancee who had just completed her OB/Gyn rotation whether it was possible to be born after fewer than six months in gestation and survive, and apparently it is possible, albeit unlikely, with proper postnatal care. Wikipedia confirms that babies born at 23 weeks, or about five months and ten days, have about a 20% chance to survive. So the child born six months later may not have been in gestation just because he was born six months later. Ha Barbri, we win.

Now about that fixtures question...
That's great on the facts, but the issue here is the law. The general rule is that any child born within 300 days of the testator's death is presumed to have already been in gestation.

0L Hoping for 1
Posts: 1325
Joined: Sun Jan 25, 2009 9:36 pm

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

Postby 0L Hoping for 1 » Wed Jul 10, 2013 1:01 pm

Anyone else find the Simulated Final Exam completely brutal?

Stinson
Posts: 257
Joined: Tue Mar 23, 2010 12:01 am

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

Postby Stinson » Wed Jul 10, 2013 1:09 pm

bgdddymtty wrote:
Stinson wrote:
goodolgil wrote:LOL @ the simulated MBE question that required a deducement that some grandson was in gestation (and thus eligible for a class gift) because he was born six months later.

BarBri: never not hiding the ball.


Just to hate on Barbri a little more, I asked my fiancee who had just completed her OB/Gyn rotation whether it was possible to be born after fewer than six months in gestation and survive, and apparently it is possible, albeit unlikely, with proper postnatal care. Wikipedia confirms that babies born at 23 weeks, or about five months and ten days, have about a 20% chance to survive. So the child born six months later may not have been in gestation just because he was born six months later. Ha Barbri, we win.

Now about that fixtures question...
That's great on the facts, but the issue here is the law. The general rule is that any child born within 300 days of the testator's death is presumed to have already been in gestation.


Oh, I didn't know there was actually a presumption related to it, I thought the rule was just whether the baby was in gestation or not. I guess it makes sense not to look into when the baby was conceived. My lecture with Franseze hit the womb rule but I don't think she mentioned the presumption. Or maybe the presumption was part of one of her songs and I just zoned out.

rnf1292
Posts: 63
Joined: Sun Jun 30, 2013 2:11 pm

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

Postby rnf1292 » Wed Jul 10, 2013 2:26 pm

Has anyone done the MPQ2 half day exam (first thing in the book)?

I thought it was extremely tricky and am not happy with my score. As if I wasn't already freaking out enough :shock: I thought I had heard others on here saying the MPQ2 was supposed to be easier..

User avatar
Joe Quincy
Posts: 404
Joined: Thu May 16, 2013 10:42 am

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

Postby Joe Quincy » Wed Jul 10, 2013 2:29 pm

Stinson wrote:
bgdddymtty wrote:
Stinson wrote:
goodolgil wrote:LOL @ the simulated MBE question that required a deducement that some grandson was in gestation (and thus eligible for a class gift) because he was born six months later.

BarBri: never not hiding the ball.


Just to hate on Barbri a little more, I asked my fiancee who had just completed her OB/Gyn rotation whether it was possible to be born after fewer than six months in gestation and survive, and apparently it is possible, albeit unlikely, with proper postnatal care. Wikipedia confirms that babies born at 23 weeks, or about five months and ten days, have about a 20% chance to survive. So the child born six months later may not have been in gestation just because he was born six months later. Ha Barbri, we win.

Now about that fixtures question...
That's great on the facts, but the issue here is the law. The general rule is that any child born within 300 days of the testator's death is presumed to have already been in gestation.


Oh, I didn't know there was actually a presumption related to it, I thought the rule was just whether the baby was in gestation or not. I guess it makes sense not to look into when the baby was conceived. My lecture with Franseze hit the womb rule but I don't think she mentioned the presumption. Or maybe the presumption was part of one of her songs and I just zoned out.


Her handout said it in VA. Actually she doesn't ever address whether it was ACTUALLY in gestation. The rule she states is just born within 10 months after death.

In Wills, they said the child must be in gestation and must be born within 10 months. So what happens if the kid goes extremely long? I guess they wouldn't be a class member then.

Myself
Posts: 1372
Joined: Sat Jun 23, 2012 1:36 pm

.

Postby Myself » Wed Jul 10, 2013 5:35 pm

.
Last edited by Myself on Tue Nov 19, 2013 9:42 pm, edited 1 time in total.

lawdawg09
Posts: 68
Joined: Tue Jul 09, 2013 4:45 pm

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

Postby lawdawg09 » Wed Jul 10, 2013 10:49 pm

The simulated written exam... Ouch.

For the first time I am starting to get concerned...

The next 19 days are going to SUCK.

User avatar
bgdddymtty
Posts: 697
Joined: Thu Feb 11, 2010 12:59 pm

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

Postby bgdddymtty » Wed Jul 10, 2013 10:56 pm

I'm losing my mind here. Someone please help me out. What's the name of the modification to comparative negligence whereby a victim who is 50+% (or, in some jurisdictions, >50%) at fault is barred from recovering?

User avatar
nevdash
Posts: 409
Joined: Sun Dec 07, 2008 5:01 pm

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

Postby nevdash » Wed Jul 10, 2013 10:57 pm

bgdddymtty wrote:I'm losing my mind here. Someone please help me out. What's the name of the modification to comparative negligence whereby a victim who is 50+% (or, in some jurisdictions, >50%) at fault is barred from recovering?

Contributory negligence.

BCLS
Posts: 567
Joined: Mon Aug 23, 2010 9:40 am

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

Postby BCLS » Wed Jul 10, 2013 10:58 pm

nevdash wrote:
bgdddymtty wrote:I'm losing my mind here. Someone please help me out. What's the name of the modification to comparative negligence whereby a victim who is 50+% (or, in some jurisdictions, >50%) at fault is barred from recovering?

Contributory negligence.

partial comparative negligence. Contrib is a total bar.

User avatar
nevdash
Posts: 409
Joined: Sun Dec 07, 2008 5:01 pm

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

Postby nevdash » Wed Jul 10, 2013 10:59 pm

lawdawg09 wrote:The simulated written exam... Ouch.

For the first time I am starting to get concerned...

The next 19 days are going to SUCK.

Ugh agreed. Doing 3-hour exams in law school was bad enough, but doing two of them in one day? And then coming back for more testing the next day? Jesus.

User avatar
nevdash
Posts: 409
Joined: Sun Dec 07, 2008 5:01 pm

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

Postby nevdash » Wed Jul 10, 2013 11:00 pm

BCLS wrote:
nevdash wrote:
bgdddymtty wrote:I'm losing my mind here. Someone please help me out. What's the name of the modification to comparative negligence whereby a victim who is 50+% (or, in some jurisdictions, >50%) at fault is barred from recovering?

Contributory negligence.

partial comparative negligence. Contrib is a total bar.

Damnit I just realized my mistake before I saw your post haha. Thanks for the catch.

BCLS
Posts: 567
Joined: Mon Aug 23, 2010 9:40 am

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

Postby BCLS » Wed Jul 10, 2013 11:00 pm

nevdash wrote:
BCLS wrote:
nevdash wrote:
bgdddymtty wrote:I'm losing my mind here. Someone please help me out. What's the name of the modification to comparative negligence whereby a victim who is 50+% (or, in some jurisdictions, >50%) at fault is barred from recovering?

Contributory negligence.

partial comparative negligence. Contrib is a total bar.

Damnit I just realized my mistake before I saw your post haha. Thanks for the catch.

all good man. We are all a bit fried.




Return to “Forum for Law School Students”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Bing [Bot] and 3 guests