Agreed. If it's civ pro, I am screwed, especially if it's anything other than a SMJX, PJX, and an easy Supp (something like obviously compulsory is nice). Anything else, whatever, I don't care.jmhendri wrote:Anything but civ pro is ok by me. If this is the first year they test it three years in a row, I might walk out.
California Bar Exam (July 2013) thread Forum
-
- Posts: 62
- Joined: Fri Apr 13, 2012 9:45 pm
Re: California Bar Exam (July 2013) thread
- jmhendri
- Posts: 589
- Joined: Wed Nov 18, 2009 8:33 pm
Re: California Bar Exam (July 2013) thread
I had to look up the lender's right to a credit bid at break via google. Definitely wasn't in the shorter outlines. And the due-on-sale clause was a flame twice...
Last edited by jmhendri on Wed Jul 31, 2013 9:20 pm, edited 1 time in total.
- Reinhardt
- Posts: 458
- Joined: Fri May 18, 2007 2:27 am
Re: California Bar Exam (July 2013) thread
Does such a right exist?jmhendri wrote:I had to look up the lender's right to a credit bid at break via google. Definitely wasn't in the shorter outlines. And the due on sale clause was a flame twice...
- Emma.
- Posts: 2408
- Joined: Sun Oct 05, 2008 7:57 pm
Re: California Bar Exam (July 2013) thread
Was that (the lender's right to bid the value of the loan) a thing?jmhendri wrote:I had to look up the lender's right to a credit bid at break via google. Definitely wasn't in the shorter outlines. And the due on sale clause was a flame twice...
Want to continue reading?
Register now to search topics and post comments!
Absolutely FREE!
Already a member? Login
- jmhendri
- Posts: 589
- Joined: Wed Nov 18, 2009 8:33 pm
Re: California Bar Exam (July 2013) thread
Theoretically, according to this probably completely unreliable article I found
- jmhendri
- Posts: 589
- Joined: Wed Nov 18, 2009 8:33 pm
Re: California Bar Exam (July 2013) thread
yeah. I'm not even sure what I put. All I remember is that I had it down to two choices...Emma. wrote:Was that (the lender's right to bid the value of the loan) a thing?jmhendri wrote:I had to look up the lender's right to a credit bid at break via google. Definitely wasn't in the shorter outlines. And the due on sale clause was a flame twice...
- a male human
- Posts: 2233
- Joined: Tue Mar 31, 2009 2:42 pm
Re: California Bar Exam (July 2013) thread
AM was def harder than PM for me. I actually had sufficient time to check over my answers.
And WTF at some of the questions. It's pure memorization. Like the one about ineffective assistance of counsel--I was stuck between reasonable and C&C (went with reasonable as my gut choice). Or maybe both were wrong. Then again that question about the promise to pay the $200 option fee seemed to be about reasoning, but I wasted so much time before picking D (enforceable because of promise to pay). And there were a shitload of Ds and As on my answer sheet, too, 5 in a row sometimes.
This administration has been awful. All my law-related standardized tests have been, including the 2010 June LSAT (see avatar for dinos; yes, I will continue to whine about them). If anyone has given up already, perhaps you could intentionally drive the average lower for the rest of us
Or we can all take solace in the possibility that the next administration won't be as hard.
And WTF at some of the questions. It's pure memorization. Like the one about ineffective assistance of counsel--I was stuck between reasonable and C&C (went with reasonable as my gut choice). Or maybe both were wrong. Then again that question about the promise to pay the $200 option fee seemed to be about reasoning, but I wasted so much time before picking D (enforceable because of promise to pay). And there were a shitload of Ds and As on my answer sheet, too, 5 in a row sometimes.
This administration has been awful. All my law-related standardized tests have been, including the 2010 June LSAT (see avatar for dinos; yes, I will continue to whine about them). If anyone has given up already, perhaps you could intentionally drive the average lower for the rest of us
Or we can all take solace in the possibility that the next administration won't be as hard.
- Emma.
- Posts: 2408
- Joined: Sun Oct 05, 2008 7:57 pm
Re: California Bar Exam (July 2013) thread
I had 5 Ds in a row twice. Once in the AM, once in the PM.a male human wrote:AM was def harder than PM for me. I actually had sufficient time to check over my answers.
And WTF at some of the questions. It's pure memorization. Like the one about ineffective assistance of counsel--I was stuck between reasonable and C&C (went with reasonable as my gut choice). Or maybe both were wrong. Then again that question about the promise to pay the $200 option fee seemed to be about reasoning, but I wasted so much time before picking D (enforceable because of promise to pay). And there were a shitload of Ds and As on my answer sheet, too, 5 in a row sometimes.
This administration has been awful. All my law-related standardized tests have been, including the 2010 June LSAT (see avatar for dinos; yes, I will continue to whine about them). If anyone has given up already, perhaps you could intentionally drive the average lower for the rest of us
Or we can all take solace in the possibility that the next administration won't be as hard.
- Emma.
- Posts: 2408
- Joined: Sun Oct 05, 2008 7:57 pm
Re: California Bar Exam (July 2013) thread
It should have been larceny and kidnapping I think. I put false imprisonment but that was because I could only remember that kidnapping required movement of the victim, where concealment is enough.hopkins23 wrote:What did you guys put for the man who wanted wine, locked the clerk in the closet, false imprisonment/larceny/kidnapping question?
- jmhendri
- Posts: 589
- Joined: Wed Nov 18, 2009 8:33 pm
Re: California Bar Exam (July 2013) thread
Wasn't kidnapping. No concealment or movement. I put larceny and false imprisonment.hopkins23 wrote:What did you guys put for the man who wanted wine, locked the clerk in the closet, false imprisonment/larceny/kidnapping question?
Last edited by jmhendri on Wed Jul 31, 2013 9:34 pm, edited 1 time in total.
-
- Posts: 74
- Joined: Tue Mar 09, 2010 5:06 pm
Re: California Bar Exam (July 2013) thread
False imprisonment and larceny. Did not move the clerk (needed for kidnapping), and no force or threat of force to take the money (needed for robbery). I think that is right, but my brain is fried.hopkins23 wrote:What did you guys put for the man who wanted wine, locked the clerk in the closet, false imprisonment/larceny/kidnapping question?
Register now!
Resources to assist law school applicants, students & graduates.
It's still FREE!
Already a member? Login
- Reinhardt
- Posts: 458
- Joined: Fri May 18, 2007 2:27 am
Re: California Bar Exam (July 2013) thread
.
Last edited by Reinhardt on Tue Aug 13, 2013 11:32 pm, edited 1 time in total.
-
- Posts: 322
- Joined: Mon Jun 16, 2008 11:38 pm
Re: California Bar Exam (July 2013) thread
Oh yeah, now I remember a random Q re: obtaining a confession voluntarily
- Emma.
- Posts: 2408
- Joined: Sun Oct 05, 2008 7:57 pm
Re: California Bar Exam (July 2013) thread
Huh. Maybe I got that one right!Texan09 wrote:False imprisonment and larceny. Did not move the clerk (needed for kidnapping), and no force or threat of force to take the money (needed for robbery). I think that is right, but my brain is fried.hopkins23 wrote:What did you guys put for the man who wanted wine, locked the clerk in the closet, false imprisonment/larceny/kidnapping question?
-
- Posts: 322
- Joined: Mon Jun 16, 2008 11:38 pm
Re: California Bar Exam (July 2013) thread
Yeah this is what got to me. Oh wellReinhardt wrote:I'm having trouble imagining a situation where someone would be falsely imprisoned without concealment.
Get unlimited access to all forums and topics
Register now!
I'm pretty sure I told you it's FREE...
Already a member? Login
-
- Posts: 69
- Joined: Sun Jun 19, 2011 8:28 pm
Re: California Bar Exam (July 2013) thread
I was actually just googling this. My barbri notes said concealment is enough, but if that's the case what's the difference between criminal false imprisonment and kidnapping? Any time you are guilty of false imprisonment of a person into a place with a ceiling, you kidnapped them?Emma. wrote:It should have been larceny and kidnapping I think. I put false imprisonment but that was because I could only remember that kidnapping required movement of the victim, where concealment is enough.hopkins23 wrote:What did you guys put for the man who wanted wine, locked the clerk in the closet, false imprisonment/larceny/kidnapping question?
- jmhendri
- Posts: 589
- Joined: Wed Nov 18, 2009 8:33 pm
Re: California Bar Exam (July 2013) thread
Nah, false imprisonment is a better answer. Concealment from what?Emma. wrote:It should have been larceny and kidnapping I think. I put false imprisonment but that was because I could only remember that kidnapping required movement of the victim, where concealment is enough.hopkins23 wrote:What did you guys put for the man who wanted wine, locked the clerk in the closet, false imprisonment/larceny/kidnapping question?
- Emma.
- Posts: 2408
- Joined: Sun Oct 05, 2008 7:57 pm
Re: California Bar Exam (July 2013) thread
I stop you in a parking lot at night, point a gun at you, and tell you if you move I'll shoot you. You aren't concealed, but you are falsely imprisonedReinhardt wrote:I'm having trouble imagining a situation where someone would be falsely imprisoned without concealment.
-
- Posts: 322
- Joined: Mon Jun 16, 2008 11:38 pm
Re: California Bar Exam (July 2013) thread
Yeah, I am so tired I cannot even figure out the answer re: ineffective assistance of counsel by googling. It's "but for" but don't think that was a choice?a male human wrote:AM was def harder than PM for me. I actually had sufficient time to check over my answers.
And WTF at some of the questions. It's pure memorization. Like the one about ineffective assistance of counsel--I was stuck between reasonable and C&C (went with reasonable as my gut choice). Or maybe both were wrong. Then again that question about the promise to pay the $200 option fee seemed to be about reasoning, but I wasted so much time before picking D (enforceable because of promise to pay). And there were a shitload of Ds and As on my answer sheet, too, 5 in a row sometimes.
This administration has been awful. All my law-related standardized tests have been, including the 2010 June LSAT (see avatar for dinos; yes, I will continue to whine about them). If anyone has given up already, perhaps you could intentionally drive the average lower for the rest of us
Or we can all take solace in the possibility that the next administration won't be as hard.
Communicate now with those who not only know what a legal education is, but can offer you worthy advice and commentary as you complete the three most educational, yet challenging years of your law related post graduate life.
Register now, it's still FREE!
Already a member? Login
-
- Posts: 1437
- Joined: Tue Jun 30, 2009 5:11 pm
Re: California Bar Exam (July 2013) thread
Same. And picked A 6 out of 8 in the AM at one point.Emma. wrote:I had 5 Ds in a row twice. Once in the AM, once in the PM.a male human wrote:AM was def harder than PM for me. I actually had sufficient time to check over my answers.
And WTF at some of the questions. It's pure memorization. Like the one about ineffective assistance of counsel--I was stuck between reasonable and C&C (went with reasonable as my gut choice). Or maybe both were wrong. Then again that question about the promise to pay the $200 option fee seemed to be about reasoning, but I wasted so much time before picking D (enforceable because of promise to pay). And there were a shitload of Ds and As on my answer sheet, too, 5 in a row sometimes.
This administration has been awful. All my law-related standardized tests have been, including the 2010 June LSAT (see avatar for dinos; yes, I will continue to whine about them). If anyone has given up already, perhaps you could intentionally drive the average lower for the rest of us
Or we can all take solace in the possibility that the next administration won't be as hard.
Fucking shitboomer bar examiners. Fucking the lot of us they haven't yet fucked enough. Ready for bourbon and an early February retake signup.
- Emma.
- Posts: 2408
- Joined: Sun Oct 05, 2008 7:57 pm
Re: California Bar Exam (July 2013) thread
Fuck that question. The dude confessed because someone told him if he didn't they would break both his legs. Q was whether that only made his confession involuntary, or whether it also meant his Miranda waiver was void.huckabees wrote:Oh yeah, now I remember a random Q re: obtaining a confession voluntarily
- jmhendri
- Posts: 589
- Joined: Wed Nov 18, 2009 8:33 pm
Re: California Bar Exam (July 2013) thread
Eh, I think the fact that the clerk was out of sight was incidental in this case. He wasn't being hidden from anything.
-
- Posts: 322
- Joined: Mon Jun 16, 2008 11:38 pm
Re: California Bar Exam (July 2013) thread
Correct answer was?Emma. wrote:Fuck that question. The dude confessed because someone told him if he didn't they would break both his legs. Q was whether that only made his confession involuntary, or whether it also meant his Miranda waiver was void.huckabees wrote:Oh yeah, now I remember a random Q re: obtaining a confession voluntarily
Also evid question on whether someone waived both hearsay and confrontation
I had As Ds and Cs in a row... only letter I didn't have that for was B ::sigh::
Last edited by huckabees on Wed Jul 31, 2013 9:42 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Seriously? What are you waiting for?
Now there's a charge.
Just kidding ... it's still FREE!
Already a member? Login