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
usuaggie
Posts: 585
Joined: Thu Dec 10, 2009 8:43 pm

Re: California Bar Exam (July 2013) thread

Postby usuaggie » Wed Jul 31, 2013 10:10 pm

jmhendri wrote:I have to disagree with you guys on this kidnapping thing. Kidnapping = concealment in a "secret place" (as per barbri). Criminal false imprisonment only requires confinement against someone's will. What was the clerk being concealed from? Nothing, he was just being kept out the way.

Now I look like a schmuck. Same thing, right after lol

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 10:11 pm

Emma. wrote:
TaipeiMort wrote:
You don't need actual force if you did it in their presence.


Disagree. The taking itself wasn't accomplished by force or threat of force. I could be wrong, but no UChicago consensus on this one.


That's just what the Themis outline says, but I got it wrong because I chose false imprisonment instead of kidnapping. That question should really be thrown out because you could argue for either false imprisonment or kidnapping (against their will and concealed) and you could argue Robbery (was in their presence) or Larceny (was not/ no threat of force).
Last edited by TaipeiMort on Wed Jul 31, 2013 10:11 pm, edited 1 time in total.

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

Re: California Bar Exam (July 2013) thread

Postby Tangerine Gleam » Wed Jul 31, 2013 10:11 pm

.

somethingdemure
Posts: 70
Joined: Sun Jun 19, 2011 8:28 pm

Re: California Bar Exam (July 2013) thread

Postby somethingdemure » Wed Jul 31, 2013 10:12 pm

Everything I'm seeing on google search is that common law kidnapping requires movement. So I think the concealment is some small exception where the concealment is a functional asportation.

Also I don't think it can be robbery. Clerk would never have been in fear.

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 10:13 pm

Had ALL of these, including the cloning embryo one.


Didn't have cloning embryo, so another experimental I guess.

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

Re: California Bar Exam (July 2013) thread

Postby bahamallamamama » Wed Jul 31, 2013 10:14 pm

essay topics for tmrw?

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

Re: California Bar Exam (July 2013) thread

Postby huckabees » Wed Jul 31, 2013 10:14 pm

Encroachment on an easement previously granted?

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 10:14 pm

Got to the end of Section 1, had about 15 that I wasn't positive on.

Got to the end of Section 2, had exactly 50 that I wasn't positive on.

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

Re: California Bar Exam (July 2013) thread

Postby 0L Hoping for 1 » Wed Jul 31, 2013 10:15 pm

I thought no kidnapping because I remembered reading something about concealing someone to complete a crime is not kidnapping unless there was some other requirement. But I can be totally off and was not that confident.

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 10:15 pm

somethingdemure wrote:Everything I'm seeing on google search is that common law kidnapping requires movement. So I think the concealment is some small exception where the concealment is a functional asportation.

Also I don't think it can be robbery. Clerk would never have been in fear.


Force or intimidation. Is locking them in a room force? Is taking from the till while they are in the locked room in their presence?

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

Re: California Bar Exam (July 2013) thread

Postby Reinhardt » Wed Jul 31, 2013 10:16 pm

I have a feeling NCBE takes a look at the BarBri and Themis outlines and says, hmm, how can we think up a bunch of questions that expose the differences between their grossly oversimplified version of the law and ours?

User avatar
usuaggie
Posts: 585
Joined: Thu Dec 10, 2009 8:43 pm

Re: California Bar Exam (July 2013) thread

Postby usuaggie » Wed Jul 31, 2013 10:17 pm

TaipeiMort wrote:
somethingdemure wrote:Everything I'm seeing on google search is that common law kidnapping requires movement. So I think the concealment is some small exception where the concealment is a functional asportation.

Also I don't think it can be robbery. Clerk would never have been in fear.


Force or intimidation. Is locking them in a room force? Is taking from the till while they are in the locked room in their presence?


Definitely unquestionably presence. Don't know about force

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 10:17 pm

TaipeiMort wrote:Got to the end of Section 1, had about 15 that I wasn't positive on.

Got to the end of Section 2, had exactly 50 that I wasn't positive on.


I think I'd be similar. Section 1 seemed solidly hard but mostly fair, I'd say most questions were medium-hard.. Section 2 was like half medium, half WTF.

Now I gotta shut this shit down and try to learn CivPro, Wills, Evidence, etc etc. :cry:

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

Re: California Bar Exam (July 2013) thread

Postby AMCD » Wed Jul 31, 2013 10:19 pm

I thought thought the clerk just walked into the back room to get the expensive bottle of wine -- no force, suggestion of forced movement or involunariness of any sort I thought. He then locked the clerk inside, after following him there.
Chose larceny and false imprisonment.

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 10:20 pm

bahamallamamama wrote:essay topics for tmrw?


This. We can't do anything about today, but we can do something about tomorrow.

MBE: Property and Contracts?

CA: Remedies + Trusts?

We aren't getting Civ Pro, and don't think we are getting CA Evidence, Crims, and Business Associations/Partnerships.

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

Re: California Bar Exam (July 2013) thread

Postby bahamallamamama » Wed Jul 31, 2013 10:21 pm

TaipeiMort wrote:
bahamallamamama wrote:essay topics for tmrw?


This. We can't do anything about today, but we can do something about tomorrow.

MBE: Property and Contracts?

CA: Remedies + Trusts?

We aren't getting Civ Pro, and don't think we are getting CA Evidence, Crims, and Business Associations/Partnerships.


i am with you, brother. i can get behind those topics.

User avatar
usuaggie
Posts: 585
Joined: Thu Dec 10, 2009 8:43 pm

Re: California Bar Exam (July 2013) thread

Postby usuaggie » Wed Jul 31, 2013 10:21 pm

AMCD wrote:I thought thought the clerk just walked into the back room to get the expensive bottle of wine -- no force, suggestion of forced movement or involunariness of any sort I thought. He then locked the clerk inside, after following him there.
Chose larceny and false imprisonment.

Why isn't locking the door force?

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 10:21 pm

AMCD wrote:I thought thought the clerk just walked into the back room to get the expensive bottle of wine -- no force, suggestion of forced movement or involunariness of any sort I thought. He then locked the clerk inside, after following him there.
Chose larceny and false imprisonment.


I feel much better about this choice now than I did at the time.

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

Re: California Bar Exam (July 2013) thread

Postby Tangerine Gleam » Wed Jul 31, 2013 10:22 pm

Why so sure re: no Civ Pro or CA Evidence?

her??
Posts: 12
Joined: Wed Jul 31, 2013 9:57 pm

Re: California Bar Exam (July 2013) thread

Postby her?? » Wed Jul 31, 2013 10:22 pm

huckabees wrote:Encroachment on an easement previously granted?



is that the one that had an answer of it being usable? i think i put that though i don't know what law suggests that. there was another about a guy that expressly granted an easement, then bought back the property (so it merged and went away) then resold that part of the lot and then died and the son i think built a fence and another property owner offered an easement at a price, and there was a takings question about a setback too

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 10:24 pm

Tangerine Gleam wrote:Why so sure re: no Civ Pro or CA Evidence?


I think there will be Ev. Civ pro would be a dick move, just because it's been tested twice in a row and it's never been tested three time in a row.

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

Re: California Bar Exam (July 2013) thread

Postby Reinhardt » Wed Jul 31, 2013 10:24 pm

PT - B will probably have us as legislative aides. A state senator will give us a copy of the Magna Carta, an article from Guns & Ammo, and flyer for a local mattress sale and tell us to draft a new Columbia state constitution

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

Re: California Bar Exam (July 2013) thread

Postby Reinhardt » Wed Jul 31, 2013 10:25 pm

jmhendri wrote:
Tangerine Gleam wrote:Why so sure re: no Civ Pro or CA Evidence?


I think there will be Ev. Civ pro would be a dick move, just because it's been tested twice in a row and it's never been tested three time in a row.


So we're thinking the bar examiners aren't capable of dick moves, eh.

User avatar
existenz
Posts: 927
Joined: Tue Dec 22, 2009 3:06 am

Re: California Bar Exam (July 2013) thread

Postby existenz » Wed Jul 31, 2013 10:25 pm

:?
Last edited by existenz on Mon Aug 12, 2013 10:50 am, edited 1 time in total.

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

Re: California Bar Exam (July 2013) thread

Postby Foosters Galore » Wed Jul 31, 2013 10:27 pm

Reinhardt wrote:PT - B will probably have us as legislative aides. A state senator will give us a copy of the Magna Carta, an article from Guns & Ammo, and flyer for a local mattress sale and tell us to draft a new Columbia state constitution



This is the best thing ever.




Return to “Forum for Law School Students”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 7 guests