California Bar Exam (July 2013) thread

(Study Tips, Dealing With Stress, Maintaining a Social Life, Financial Aid, Internships, Bar Exam, Careers in Law . . . )
Another
Posts: 206
Joined: Sun Dec 30, 2012 7:16 pm

.

Postby Another » Wed Jul 31, 2013 9:41 pm

.
Last edited by Another on Fri Nov 29, 2013 5:26 pm, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
a male human
Posts: 1693
Joined: Tue Mar 31, 2009 2:42 pm

Re: California Bar Exam (July 2013) thread

Postby a male human » Wed Jul 31, 2013 9:42 pm

huckabees wrote:
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.


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?

Well, the trial court said the lawyer didn't bring up objections that could have kept out certain evidence or something. Then the Q asked what else was needed. It was down to whether D could show [a reasonable probability / C&C evidence] that result would have been different but for the unprofessional errors.

Looking at my notes, I was right in choosing reasonable probability (unless one of the other choices A/D was right). That's one crim pro question I got. There was that one question where the driver and passenger was ordered out of the car, and the passenger got patted down. Wasn't sure about that at all, just put that there was no interrogation within the meaning of Miranda.

User avatar
El_Sol
Posts: 55
Joined: Tue Jul 10, 2012 1:00 pm

Re: California Bar Exam (July 2013) thread

Postby El_Sol » Wed Jul 31, 2013 9:43 pm

This thread makes me feel better. After the exam I thought it was me. MBE was so unfair.

huckabees
Posts: 322
Joined: Mon Jun 16, 2008 11:38 pm

Re: California Bar Exam (July 2013) thread

Postby huckabees » Wed Jul 31, 2013 9:43 pm

a male human wrote:
huckabees wrote:
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.


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?

Well, the trial court said the lawyer didn't bring up objections that could have kept out certain evidence or something. Then the Q asked what else was needed. It was down to whether D could show [a reasonable probability / C&C evidence] that result would have been different but for the unprofessional errors.

Looking at my notes, I was right in choosing reasonable probability (unless one of the other choices A/D was right). That's one crim pro question I got. There was that one question where the driver and passenger was ordered out of the car, and the passenger got patted down. Wasn't sure about that at all, just put that there was no interrogation within the meaning of Miranda.


Oh I said that was a violation as the soft thing couldn't have been a weapon

Another question on crim pro was police potentially lying about warrant and then finding drugs in D's apt

I was dying by the end and think I even missed the Ks question about whether sending out letter was sufficient acceptance. Also, another Ks question on taking soil sample after they shook hands to certain terms of a deal? Some requirements/output Ks questions I was less ready for as well.
Last edited by huckabees on Wed Jul 31, 2013 9:45 pm, edited 1 time in total.

JDCA2012
Posts: 64
Joined: Fri Apr 13, 2012 9:45 pm

Re: California Bar Exam (July 2013) thread

Postby JDCA2012 » Wed Jul 31, 2013 9:44 pm

Is a promise to pay consideration for option in future = option K? I said no...but I had also never seen that scenario come up before. As per a lot of the test. Fuck.

User avatar
jmhendri
Posts: 589
Joined: Wed Nov 18, 2009 8:33 pm

Re: California Bar Exam (July 2013) thread

Postby jmhendri » Wed Jul 31, 2013 9:44 pm

a male human wrote:
huckabees wrote:
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.


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?

Well, the trial court said the lawyer didn't bring up objections that could have kept out certain evidence or something. Then the Q asked what else was needed. It was down to whether D could show [a reasonable probability / C&C evidence] that result would have been different but for the unprofessional errors.

Looking at my notes, I was right in choosing reasonable probability (unless one of the other choices A/D was right). That's one crim pro question I got. There was that one question where the driver and passenger was ordered out of the car, and the passenger got patted down. Wasn't sure about that at all, just put that there was no interrogation within the meaning of Miranda.



Shit. I put C&C because I remembered that was the harmless error standard in Wills when a will fails because of an interested witness. Bad guess.

User avatar
jmhendri
Posts: 589
Joined: Wed Nov 18, 2009 8:33 pm

Re: California Bar Exam (July 2013) thread

Postby jmhendri » Wed Jul 31, 2013 9:45 pm

JDCA2012 wrote:Is a promise to pay consideration for option in future = option K? I said no...but I had also never seen that scenario come up before. As per a lot of the test. Fuck.


A promise to perform a legal detriment is pretty much always valid consideration I think.

huckabees
Posts: 322
Joined: Mon Jun 16, 2008 11:38 pm

Re: California Bar Exam (July 2013) thread

Postby huckabees » Wed Jul 31, 2013 9:49 pm

What was up with that question where P sued D in a different jurisdiction after statute of limitations ran out?

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

Re: California Bar Exam (July 2013) thread

Postby Emma. » Wed Jul 31, 2013 9:50 pm

huckabees wrote:What was up with that question where P sued D in a different jurisdiction after statute of limitations ran out?


No full faith and credit unless the court had proper jurisdiction over the case.

User avatar
a male human
Posts: 1693
Joined: Tue Mar 31, 2009 2:42 pm

Re: California Bar Exam (July 2013) thread

Postby a male human » Wed Jul 31, 2013 9:51 pm

Emma. wrote:
huckabees wrote:What was up with that question where P sued D in a different jurisdiction after statute of limitations ran out?


No full faith and credit unless the court had proper jurisdiction over the case.


When did we even learn this shit

Man, I def got at least one of the mortgage questions wrong because I thought "subject to" was "assumed" and let the poor buyer take the fall for the deficiency judgment

Another
Posts: 206
Joined: Sun Dec 30, 2012 7:16 pm

.

Postby Another » Wed Jul 31, 2013 9:51 pm

.
Last edited by Another on Fri Nov 29, 2013 5:58 pm, edited 2 times in total.

User avatar
TaipeiMort
Posts: 874
Joined: Tue Jun 02, 2009 11:51 pm

Re: California Bar Exam (July 2013) thread

Postby TaipeiMort » Wed Jul 31, 2013 9:52 pm

huckabees wrote:What was up with that question where P sued D in a different jurisdiction after statute of limitations ran out?


Full faith and credit requires jurisdiction, which the state didn't have.

Another
Posts: 206
Joined: Sun Dec 30, 2012 7:16 pm

.

Postby Another » Wed Jul 31, 2013 9:52 pm

.
Last edited by Another on Fri Nov 29, 2013 5:26 pm, edited 1 time in total.

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

Re: California Bar Exam (July 2013) thread

Postby Emma. » Wed Jul 31, 2013 9:53 pm

TaipeiMort wrote:
huckabees wrote:What was up with that question where P sued D in a different jurisdiction after statute of limitations ran out?


Full faith and credit requires jurisdiction, which the state didn't have.


When the two UChicago kids in this thread give you the same answer, it MUST be right. :P

Gloriaha
Posts: 15
Joined: Wed Jun 03, 2009 12:51 pm

Re: California Bar Exam (July 2013) thread

Postby Gloriaha » Wed Jul 31, 2013 9:53 pm

So, I think I had a purely Civ Pro MBE question disguised as a tort. Thinking it was one of the ten experimentals, especially in light of the fact that Civ Pro will be the 7th MBE subject starting 2015.

The question involved a a suit for negligence occurring in state A, where P and D both resided, but the statute of limitations had run on P's cause of action in state A. So, P moved to a different state that had a longer SoL and filed there. D never filed an answer. P obtained a judgment, D never appealed. P takes judgment back to state A to enforce. One answer choice was lack of personal jx, two answer choices were about the SoLs, and fourth answer choice was about failure to appeal. So yeah, civ pro wtf?

JDCA2012
Posts: 64
Joined: Fri Apr 13, 2012 9:45 pm

Re: California Bar Exam (July 2013) thread

Postby JDCA2012 » Wed Jul 31, 2013 9:54 pm

jmhendri wrote:
JDCA2012 wrote:Is a promise to pay consideration for option in future = option K? I said no...but I had also never seen that scenario come up before. As per a lot of the test. Fuck.


A promise to perform a legal detriment is pretty much always valid consideration I think.


But it was to keep the offer open? I mean if he tendered the 200, no problem, but he didn't. SO i was like uh. he promised to pay to keep it open? but didnt? can you have a separate contract based on a promise to pay consideration for keeping an offer open for an option for a contract?

Gloriaha
Posts: 15
Joined: Wed Jun 03, 2009 12:51 pm

Re: California Bar Exam (July 2013) thread

Postby Gloriaha » Wed Jul 31, 2013 9:54 pm

Oh don't tell me that was con law!!

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

Re: California Bar Exam (July 2013) thread

Postby Emma. » Wed Jul 31, 2013 9:54 pm

Gloriaha wrote:So, I think I had a purely Civ Pro MBE question disguised as a tort. Thinking it was one of the ten experimentals, especially in light of the fact that Civ Pro will be the 7th MBE subject starting 2015.

The question involved a a suit for negligence occurring in state A, where P and D both resided, but the statute of limitations had run on P's cause of action in state A. So, P moved to a different state that had a longer SoL and filed there. D never filed an answer. P obtained a judgment, D never appealed. P takes judgment back to state A to enforce. One answer choice was lack of personal jx, two answer choices were about the SoLs, and fourth answer choice was about failure to appeal. So yeah, civ pro wtf?


See directly above. It was a ConLaw FFC question.

huckabees
Posts: 322
Joined: Mon Jun 16, 2008 11:38 pm

Re: California Bar Exam (July 2013) thread

Postby huckabees » Wed Jul 31, 2013 9:54 pm

hopkins23 wrote:
Emma. wrote:
huckabees wrote:What was up with that question where P sued D in a different jurisdiction after statute of limitations ran out?


No full faith and credit unless the court had proper jurisdiction over the case.


I HOPE YOU'RE RIGHT!

(because I chose that too).


Yeah, that sounds right. I over-thought it because for some reason, I was thinking that the court might have jurisdiction over the person but the facts were insufficient to tell or something. But that's the only answer that made sense. Hating self at moment

hlsperson1111
Posts: 239
Joined: Sun Jul 22, 2012 11:10 pm

Re: California Bar Exam (July 2013) thread

Postby hlsperson1111 » Wed Jul 31, 2013 9:55 pm

Shrug, I reached the opposite conclusion (defendant waived any objection to personal jurisdiction by defaulting so the judgment in State B is valid even if it shouldn't have been able to exercise jurisdiction and can be enforced in State A under the FFC). Oh well.

JDCA2012
Posts: 64
Joined: Fri Apr 13, 2012 9:45 pm

Re: California Bar Exam (July 2013) thread

Postby JDCA2012 » Wed Jul 31, 2013 9:55 pm

Gloriaha wrote:So, I think I had a purely Civ Pro MBE question disguised as a tort. Thinking it was one of the ten experimentals, especially in light of the fact that Civ Pro will be the 7th MBE subject starting 2015.

The question involved a a suit for negligence occurring in state A, where P and D both resided, but the statute of limitations had run on P's cause of action in state A. So, P moved to a different state that had a longer SoL and filed there. D never filed an answer. P obtained a judgment, D never appealed. P takes judgment back to state A to enforce. One answer choice was lack of personal jx, two answer choices were about the SoLs, and fourth answer choice was about failure to appeal. So yeah, civ pro wtf?


Yeah I couldn't decide if it was a civ pro experimental or a con law full faith and credit Q

Another
Posts: 206
Joined: Sun Dec 30, 2012 7:16 pm

.

Postby Another » Wed Jul 31, 2013 9:55 pm

.
Last edited by Another on Fri Nov 29, 2013 5:26 pm, edited 1 time in total.

vacations
Posts: 102
Joined: Thu Feb 12, 2009 4:51 pm

Re: California Bar Exam (July 2013) thread

Postby vacations » Wed Jul 31, 2013 9:56 pm

so...how exactly am I supposed to find the energy to review tonight for tmr's race when I seriously can't stop thinking how I've alraedy failed this Bar exam...

so depressed...words of encouragement?

huckabees
Posts: 322
Joined: Mon Jun 16, 2008 11:38 pm

Re: California Bar Exam (July 2013) thread

Postby huckabees » Wed Jul 31, 2013 9:57 pm

Question on best reason to object when W was shown P's complaint and "remembered"?
Last edited by huckabees on Wed Jul 31, 2013 9:59 pm, edited 1 time in total.

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

Re: California Bar Exam (July 2013) thread

Postby Old Gregg » Wed Jul 31, 2013 9:57 pm

vacations wrote:so...how exactly am I supposed to find the energy to review tonight for tmr's race when I seriously can't stop thinking how I've alraedy failed this Bar exam...

so depressed...words of encouragement?


same here. jsut need energy.




Return to “Forum for Law School Students”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 4 guests