California Bar Exam (July 2013) thread

(Study Tips, Dealing With Stress, Maintaining a Social Life, Financial Aid, Internships, Bar Exam, Careers in Law . . . )
User avatar
Mick Haller
Posts: 1258
Joined: Mon Mar 28, 2011 3:24 pm

Re: California Bar Exam (July 2013) thread

Postby Mick Haller » Mon Jul 29, 2013 7:55 pm

vacations wrote:Sitting here in the hotel room thinking I can't remember a thing on my outlines when i know i've put in the hard work the last 10 weeks or so...trying to calm the nerves...

any words of advice ?


It will come to you on the exam. Just be calm and think clearly.

Last year I forgot the community property rule for torts committed by one spouse (depends on whether tort occurred in furtherance of community interests, eg, while driving to work). I thought about it for 3 or 4 minutes and it came to me.

You are just stressed and anxious. Try to relax, and be confident that you will do what you need to tomorrow.

User avatar
Shaggier1
Posts: 721
Joined: Tue Apr 14, 2009 8:57 am

Re: California Bar Exam (July 2013) thread

Postby Shaggier1 » Mon Jul 29, 2013 8:42 pm

Don't forget to write "applicant" on your PTs. Not a huge deal but I think I wrote my real name on one of mine.


We're not supposed to use our names? I always saw that the sample PT's said "applicant" but I assumed that was because they were samples.

Good to know... thanks!

User avatar
Reinhardt
Posts: 458
Joined: Fri May 18, 2007 2:27 am

Re: California Bar Exam (July 2013) thread

Postby Reinhardt » Mon Jul 29, 2013 8:44 pm

I'd rather put Lionel Hutz than Applicant. Think that would hurt me?

Kretzy
Posts: 1431
Joined: Tue Jun 30, 2009 5:11 pm

Re: California Bar Exam (July 2013) thread

Postby Kretzy » Mon Jul 29, 2013 8:45 pm

Reinhardt wrote:I'd rather put Lionel Hutz than Applicant. Think that would hurt me?


I was gonna write Barry Zuckercorn. So that they know I'm very good.

It's foolproof.

User avatar
worldtraveler
Posts: 7669
Joined: Mon Oct 15, 2007 4:47 am

Re: California Bar Exam (July 2013) thread

Postby worldtraveler » Mon Jul 29, 2013 8:51 pm

Fresh Prince wrote:Torts: What's the solution where there are two fires that go toward same house, merge into one and burn house? Who's liable? Keep forgetting how to resolve that.


They're both liable. If I understand it correcty, the burden is then on each defendant to show that their fire did not cause the damage to the house. Standard joint and several liability.

User avatar
Emma.
Posts: 2401
Joined: Sun Oct 05, 2008 7:57 pm

Re: California Bar Exam (July 2013) thread

Postby Emma. » Mon Jul 29, 2013 8:51 pm

From the Denver Airport:

Reviewing PR. Noticed that in CA any attorney who doesn't have liability insurance must disclose in writing to any client needing more than 4 hours of legal work at start of representation. Surely throwing that out there that is worth 5 points in pretty much any situation?

You're welcome. :wink:

User avatar
Mick Haller
Posts: 1258
Joined: Mon Mar 28, 2011 3:24 pm

Re: California Bar Exam (July 2013) thread

Postby Mick Haller » Mon Jul 29, 2013 9:37 pm

Shaggier1 wrote:
Don't forget to write "applicant" on your PTs. Not a huge deal but I think I wrote my real name on one of mine.


We're not supposed to use our names? I always saw that the sample PT's said "applicant" but I assumed that was because they were samples.

Good to know... thanks!


Yeah the grading is supposed to be anon. Unless they tell you what your fictitious name is (and I don't think they usually do), you should sign your PT memos "From: Applicant"

User avatar
Mroberts3
Posts: 300
Joined: Sat Oct 03, 2009 10:10 pm

Re: California Bar Exam (July 2013) thread

Postby Mroberts3 » Mon Jul 29, 2013 9:57 pm

worldtraveler wrote:
Fresh Prince wrote:Torts: What's the solution where there are two fires that go toward same house, merge into one and burn house? Who's liable? Keep forgetting how to resolve that.


They're both liable. If I understand it correcty, the burden is then on each defendant to show that their fire did not cause the damage to the house. Standard joint and several liability.


They are both liable, BUT there is no burden shifting. They are liable (full stop) because each fire was a substantial factor in the harm. You are thinking of a situation where two defendants each do something (shoot a gun) but it is factually impossible for them to have both shot the 1 bullet that hit the plaintiff. In that case the burden shifts to the Ds. In the case of a merged fire they both become responsible for the resulting fire.

User avatar
Reinhardt
Posts: 458
Joined: Fri May 18, 2007 2:27 am

Re: California Bar Exam (July 2013) thread

Postby Reinhardt » Mon Jul 29, 2013 10:02 pm

So in federal evidence your "Legal Relevance" does the probative value, danger of unfair prejudice balancing. In California evidence, in a criminal trial, for "Legal Relevance" you skip the balancing and just say "Prop 8 says all factually relevant evidence is included unless some specific exception"??

User avatar
Mroberts3
Posts: 300
Joined: Sat Oct 03, 2009 10:10 pm

Re: California Bar Exam (July 2013) thread

Postby Mroberts3 » Mon Jul 29, 2013 10:29 pm

Reinhardt wrote:So in federal evidence your "Legal Relevance" does the probative value, danger of unfair prejudice balancing. In California evidence, in a criminal trial, for "Legal Relevance" you skip the balancing and just say "Prop 8 says all factually relevant evidence is included unless some specific exception"??


I think a judge can still exclude under CEC 352 (same idea as FRE 403(?))

I don't get prop 8 -- so many loopholes that it seems meaningless. I would just mention it but almost always find it doesn't apply because some exception or other still controls (such as privilege, hearsay, etc).

deadlinguo
Posts: 55
Joined: Sat Aug 22, 2009 9:47 pm

Re: California Bar Exam (July 2013) thread

Postby deadlinguo » Mon Jul 29, 2013 10:33 pm

California evidence seems to be mostly a reworded/renumbered version of the federal rules. The distinctions are mostly minor things. The biggest one I can think of ATM would be the rules for qualifying expert witnesses, and admissibility of learned treatises. How do you guys feel?

bahamallamamama
Posts: 20
Joined: Sun Jul 08, 2012 5:41 pm

Re: California Bar Exam (July 2013) thread

Postby bahamallamamama » Mon Jul 29, 2013 10:39 pm

wtf is up with this dance party outside the hyatt in century city

User avatar
a male human
Posts: 1691
Joined: Tue Mar 31, 2009 2:42 pm

Re: California Bar Exam (July 2013) thread

Postby a male human » Mon Jul 29, 2013 11:02 pm

The FRE was literally based on the CEC.

User avatar
Old Gregg
Posts: 5413
Joined: Thu Sep 01, 2011 1:26 pm

Re: California Bar Exam (July 2013) thread

Postby Old Gregg » Mon Jul 29, 2013 11:30 pm

Really hope A&P isn't on the exam. I literally haven't studied/reviewed/seen a thing about it.

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

Re: California Bar Exam (July 2013) thread

Postby Tangerine Gleam » Mon Jul 29, 2013 11:57 pm

For those who enjoy learning by teaching: anyone want to give a last-minute primer on exactly where Prop 8 *actually* has a material effect on admissibility of evidence (as compared to result under CEC alone)? There are so many exceptions and I'm really having trouble getting it to stick.

EDIT: fixed a great typo

User avatar
Reinhardt
Posts: 458
Joined: Fri May 18, 2007 2:27 am

Re: California Bar Exam (July 2013) thread

Postby Reinhardt » Tue Jul 30, 2013 12:05 am

I can tell you that according to Wikipedia, the practical effect of Prop 8 is that the California constitution is not construed to exclude more evidence than the federal constitution. So that's good for us.

AntiHuman
Posts: 177
Joined: Sat Oct 30, 2010 5:48 pm

Re: California Bar Exam (July 2013) thread

Postby AntiHuman » Tue Jul 30, 2013 12:06 am

Have done absolutely nothing for civpro, agency, partnership, corporations

If any of that shows, i get a 40. I might study some of them tues and wed night?

User avatar
Reinhardt
Posts: 458
Joined: Fri May 18, 2007 2:27 am

Re: California Bar Exam (July 2013) thread

Postby Reinhardt » Tue Jul 30, 2013 12:08 am

You get at least a 45 when you write coherent sentences vaguely resembling a response. So at least do that.

User avatar
Old Gregg
Posts: 5413
Joined: Thu Sep 01, 2011 1:26 pm

Re: California Bar Exam (July 2013) thread

Postby Old Gregg » Tue Jul 30, 2013 12:09 am

AntiHuman wrote:Have done absolutely nothing for civpro, agency, partnership, corporations

If any of that shows, i get a 40. I might study some of them tues and wed night?


IDK I'd focus on MBE for T night and then on the rest for W night, if you have the wherewithal in the first place. I know I didn't back in the day.

AntiHuman
Posts: 177
Joined: Sat Oct 30, 2010 5:48 pm

Re: California Bar Exam (July 2013) thread

Postby AntiHuman » Tue Jul 30, 2013 12:13 am

Fresh Prince wrote:
AntiHuman wrote:Have done absolutely nothing for civpro, agency, partnership, corporations

If any of that shows, i get a 40. I might study some of them tues and wed night?


IDK I'd focus on MBE for T night and then on the rest for W night, if you have the wherewithal in the first place. I know I didn't back in the day.



My problem is i spent 90 percent of my effort on mbe subjects. Im getting 70 percent on mbe. I have never fully simulated a PT and have rarely done practice essays for non mbe subjects. And i literally have done no essays or review of the 4 subjects i listed. Hopefully i learned my lesson for february

User avatar
Reinhardt
Posts: 458
Joined: Fri May 18, 2007 2:27 am

Re: California Bar Exam (July 2013) thread

Postby Reinhardt » Tue Jul 30, 2013 12:19 am

133 raw is pretty good. Try to rack up points on the essays you know and mitigate damage on the essays you don't.

And a lot of people don't study at all for the PT. Most important thing there is to follow the directions and then do what comes naturally.

User avatar
a male human
Posts: 1691
Joined: Tue Mar 31, 2009 2:42 pm

Re: California Bar Exam (July 2013) thread

Postby a male human » Tue Jul 30, 2013 12:24 am

I'm worried about the subjective variances between 55-65 that I keep hearing about.

User avatar
Mick Haller
Posts: 1258
Joined: Mon Mar 28, 2011 3:24 pm

Re: California Bar Exam (July 2013) thread

Postby Mick Haller » Tue Jul 30, 2013 12:26 am

AntiHuman wrote:
Fresh Prince wrote:
AntiHuman wrote:Have done absolutely nothing for civpro, agency, partnership, corporations

If any of that shows, i get a 40. I might study some of them tues and wed night?


IDK I'd focus on MBE for T night and then on the rest for W night, if you have the wherewithal in the first place. I know I didn't back in the day.



My problem is i spent 90 percent of my effort on mbe subjects. Im getting 70 percent on mbe. I have never fully simulated a PT and have rarely done practice essays for non mbe subjects. And i literally have done no essays or review of the 4 subjects i listed. Hopefully i learned my lesson for february


This was more or less my strategy. I passed.

MBE is what causes most people to fail. Good luck tomorrow!

User avatar
Old Gregg
Posts: 5413
Joined: Thu Sep 01, 2011 1:26 pm

Re: California Bar Exam (July 2013) thread

Postby Old Gregg » Tue Jul 30, 2013 12:30 am

Look guys: At this point, Barbri (whatever testing company you used) should have prepared you to kick butt on the MBE (you don't know it because their questions are really hard, but it's true). Doing "well" on the essays and the PTs is really just to build cushion.

As I was studying the CA specific subjects this week, I literally envisaged myself passing with the MBE and just stockpiling extra points. Really took a lot of stress out. View tomorrow as "grab as many points as you can day," rather than "omg if I fuck this up I'm gonna fail day."

User avatar
Old Gregg
Posts: 5413
Joined: Thu Sep 01, 2011 1:26 pm

Re: California Bar Exam (July 2013) thread

Postby Old Gregg » Tue Jul 30, 2013 12:31 am

Also great to get schadenfreude. When I did the bar for another state, there were people next to me who left their essays blank. When you reach the testing center, you'll see how underprepared a lot of people are.

In all reality, most of you gunned like 1Ls.




Return to “Forum for Law School Students”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 10 guests