.

JD_done
Posts: 40
Joined: Thu May 30, 2013 9:04 am

Re: THEMIS BAR REVIEW Hangout.

Postby JD_done » Sun Jul 07, 2013 11:02 am

elysiansmiles wrote:I feel like in Contracts I'm reading the same fact patterns over and over again with different nouns substituted. I just did a question about a Law Review prize that I think was exactly the same as a question about a Poetry prize a few question sets ago. I've had a few where I think only the party names were changed. Either I'm going crazy, or I've read all the Contracts fact patterns in existence and now we're on repeat.



I'm running into this as well. Yesterday I did some MBE questions from Kaplan and scored CONSIDERABLY worse than on Themis. I think I got used to the Themis fact patterns and that accounts for the increase in MBE scores. The Kaplan questions were a good wake up call for me.

missinglink
Posts: 946
Joined: Mon Dec 07, 2009 12:49 am

Re: THEMIS BAR REVIEW Hangout.

Postby missinglink » Sun Jul 07, 2013 11:30 am

elysiansmiles wrote:I feel like in Contracts I'm reading the same fact patterns over and over again with different nouns substituted. I just did a question about a Law Review prize that I think was exactly the same as a question about a Poetry prize a few question sets ago. I've had a few where I think only the party names were changed. Either I'm going crazy, or I've read all the Contracts fact patterns in existence and now we're on repeat.

I've noticed this too. But it seems like each question tests a different nuance in contract law -- i.e., the fact pattern is the same but the call of the question is different.

I'm on mixed MBE set 5 and I'm still seeing plenty of new fact patterns. If nothing else, I think the questions are getting harder.

User avatar
HETPE3B
Posts: 126
Joined: Tue Jun 21, 2011 12:35 pm

Re: THEMIS BAR REVIEW Hangout.

Postby HETPE3B » Sun Jul 07, 2013 11:49 am

33/34 on Criminal Law & Procedure MBE PQs Session 5.. Something has to make up for my abysmal Evidence performance.

(btw, there was nothing on procedure in it, just crim law)

User avatar
Agoraphobia
Posts: 193
Joined: Sat Jun 15, 2013 7:30 pm

Re: THEMIS BAR REVIEW Hangout.

Postby Agoraphobia » Sun Jul 07, 2013 12:02 pm

Speaking of taking the test, we haven't gotten locations yet for Illinois, have we? Or else I've totally missed that info...

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

Re: THEMIS BAR REVIEW Hangout.

Postby Kretzy » Sun Jul 07, 2013 1:34 pm

HETPE3B wrote:33/34 on Criminal Law & Procedure MBE PQs Session 5.. Something has to make up for my abysmal Evidence performance.

(btw, there was nothing on procedure in it, just crim law)


Nice :) I'm fucking all over the place. From 30/34 in Evidence set 5 (which I'm generally inept in) to 13/34 in Contracts set 4 (which I booked in law school).

I'm trying to focus on the aggregates and not the individual question sets, but I tend to just self-medicate with wine regardless of high scores or low scores.

balzie94
Posts: 182
Joined: Wed Sep 12, 2012 1:41 pm

Re: THEMIS BAR REVIEW Hangout.

Postby balzie94 » Sun Jul 07, 2013 1:46 pm

Agoraphobia wrote:Maybe it's just that it's the last lecture set, but Secured Transactions is literally, physically, painful.


+1. So painful.

dsclaw
Posts: 88
Joined: Tue Jun 18, 2013 7:36 pm

Re: THEMIS BAR REVIEW Hangout.

Postby dsclaw » Sun Jul 07, 2013 2:42 pm

Just a question for you guys when it says "Review..... Advanced Sales" how much time are you guys averaging on these sections, I just Reviewed ny crim law and it took me like 3 hours to reread everything... The reason I ask is because I have 7 of those scheduled today.

User avatar
BarbellDreams
Posts: 2256
Joined: Thu Mar 19, 2009 6:10 pm

Re: THEMIS BAR REVIEW Hangout.

Postby BarbellDreams » Sun Jul 07, 2013 2:46 pm

Some I spend 5 minutes on, some I spend an hour on. Really depends how confident I am in the subject.

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

Re: THEMIS BAR REVIEW Hangout.

Postby Reinhardt » Sun Jul 07, 2013 2:49 pm

Many thanks to Robert Pushaw, whose CA Civil Procedure lectures have a median length of 8 minutes.

User avatar
HETPE3B
Posts: 126
Joined: Tue Jun 21, 2011 12:35 pm

Re: THEMIS BAR REVIEW Hangout.

Postby HETPE3B » Sun Jul 07, 2013 2:50 pm

National average for NY professional responsibility multiple choice questions is 0%. I also missed both pr questions in the only NY module I took so far. :mrgreen:

09042014
Posts: 18282
Joined: Wed Oct 14, 2009 10:47 pm

Re: THEMIS BAR REVIEW Hangout.

Postby 09042014 » Sun Jul 07, 2013 2:53 pm

I really wish they gave condensed outlines for all subjects.

User avatar
Dr. Review
Posts: 1797
Joined: Sat Jan 30, 2010 1:51 am

Re: THEMIS BAR REVIEW Hangout.

Postby Dr. Review » Sun Jul 07, 2013 3:20 pm

Desert Fox wrote:I really wish they gave condensed outlines for all subjects.


+1. You and me both, brother. You and me both.

User avatar
HETPE3B
Posts: 126
Joined: Tue Jun 21, 2011 12:35 pm

Re: THEMIS BAR REVIEW Hangout.

Postby HETPE3B » Sun Jul 07, 2013 3:23 pm

Bedsole wrote:
Desert Fox wrote:I really wish they gave condensed outlines for all subjects.


+1. You and me both, brother. You and me both.

+1, but I'd prefer something more expansive than the stuff they gave us for MBE subjects. Something close to the handouts, but well-formatted and without all the bullshit (like Clark's "chapter reviews" that take up half the space).

User avatar
forza
Posts: 2789
Joined: Tue Aug 04, 2009 10:32 am

Re: THEMIS BAR REVIEW Hangout.

Postby forza » Sun Jul 07, 2013 3:49 pm

I was breezing through Contracts set 5 (something like 13 for 13), then got like 6 wrong in a row and ended up getting 25/34.

Fucking infuriating.

TheBeard
Posts: 109
Joined: Sun Aug 23, 2009 6:28 pm

Re: THEMIS BAR REVIEW Hangout.

Postby TheBeard » Sun Jul 07, 2013 4:18 pm

So, apparently I am going to suck at answering NJ essay exams, especially when they deal with Ks. Twice now I've looked at a problem and said, "WHAT?" Then I read the "best answers" published by NJ, and there's no structure. Basically, it's a bunch of conclusory statements; there's no rule statement, no analysis, nothing. WTF?

User avatar
Dr. Review
Posts: 1797
Joined: Sat Jan 30, 2010 1:51 am

Re: THEMIS BAR REVIEW Hangout.

Postby Dr. Review » Sun Jul 07, 2013 4:48 pm

Image

:( :( :(

User avatar
Agoraphobia
Posts: 193
Joined: Sat Jun 15, 2013 7:30 pm

Re: THEMIS BAR REVIEW Hangout.

Postby Agoraphobia » Sun Jul 07, 2013 5:58 pm

Do we have to do the simulated MBE on the 9th? I'm looking at the schedule and I'm guessing these 30-minute reviews are meant to be completed beforehand. I'm a day or two behind so I won't have completed them all by Tuesday. Anyone know??

wh3931110
Posts: 98
Joined: Tue Nov 24, 2009 2:27 pm

Re: THEMIS BAR REVIEW Hangout.

Postby wh3931110 » Sun Jul 07, 2013 6:01 pm

Agoraphobia wrote:Speaking of taking the test, we haven't gotten locations yet for Illinois, have we? Or else I've totally missed that info...
I think there are two locations (Chicago and Springfield) and I think you submitted where you will take it when you did your application, but I can't remember. I get emails about Chicago hotel rates near the location from the the IL Bar so I assume I am signed up somehow for Chicago, but if you find out otherwise let me know.

Also, not that it really matters but the IL grader never graded my essay #4, so much for 2 business days lol FWIW I have been pretty pleased with Themis overall though, pretty sure if I do not pass the exam it will have more to do with my effort than the materials Themis provided.

balzie94
Posts: 182
Joined: Wed Sep 12, 2012 1:41 pm

Re: THEMIS BAR REVIEW Hangout.

Postby balzie94 » Sun Jul 07, 2013 6:07 pm

I know that, with my luck, I'm gonna get essays on Equity, Surety, Commercial Paper, and Secured Transactions.

JD_done
Posts: 40
Joined: Thu May 30, 2013 9:04 am

Re: THEMIS BAR REVIEW Hangout.

Postby JD_done » Sun Jul 07, 2013 6:16 pm

I took a look at the Barbri conviser mini reviews and they're pretty good. Planning on borrowing them to review because the Themis condensed outlines do nothing for me and the regular outlines are too long. I also ordered the critical pass flash cards for MBE and writing in my notes and NY distinctions.

In other news, I did so much work today and still at 53%. UGH

dsclaw
Posts: 88
Joined: Tue Jun 18, 2013 7:36 pm

Re: THEMIS BAR REVIEW Hangout.

Postby dsclaw » Sun Jul 07, 2013 6:41 pm

Spoiler: Property Question


2. (Question ID#1051)
An owner owned Broadacres in fee simple. For a consideration of $5,000, the owner gave an investor a written option to purchase Broadacres for $300,000. The option was assignable. For a consideration of $10,000, the investor subsequently gave an option to a colleague to purchase Broadacres for $325,000. The colleague exercised his option. The investor thereupon exercised his option. The investor paid the agreed price of $300,000 and took title to Broadacres by deed from the owner. Thereafter, the colleague refused to consummate his purchase. The investor brought an appropriate action against the colleague for specific performance, or, if that should be denied, then for damages. The colleague counterclaimed for return of the $10,000.

In this action the court will
A. grant money damages only to the investor.
B. grant specific performance to the investor.
C. grant the investor only the right to retain the $10,000.
D. require the investor to refund the $10,000 to the colleague.

Incorrect: Answer choice B is correct. A buyer of land is entitled to specific performance for breach when the buyer's remedy at law (i.e., money damages) is considered to be inadequate. Under the doctrine of mutuality of remedies, the seller of land is also accorded the right to obtain specific performance, even though the seller obtains only money, not land from the buyer. Answer choices A and C are incorrect because a seller, under the doctrine of mutuality of remedies, is not limited to the remedy at law of damages. Answer choice D is incorrect because once the colleague exercised his option and the investor relied on that, the colleague cannot back out.


Can someone explain to me why the Investor is entitled to specific performance? I thought investor would only be entitled to the $10,000. I don't understand how the Investor breached anything. He agreed to a option contract, which if I am not mistaken is not a acceptance of the underlying contract but just the ability to prevent the party from selling the item to another person for a specific duration. Even if we were to look at a reliance ground it does not seem one could argue that exercising a option contract equates to reasonable reliance.

User avatar
elysiansmiles
Posts: 78
Joined: Sun Nov 08, 2009 9:17 pm

Re: THEMIS BAR REVIEW Hangout.

Postby elysiansmiles » Sun Jul 07, 2013 7:02 pm

Neal Newman for Commercial Paper may be my favorite lecturer so far. He wasn't always the clearest, but he was really personable and tried to make a really boring subject somewhat more interesting. He's the kind of prof I would like to go out for a beer with.

dsclaw
Posts: 88
Joined: Tue Jun 18, 2013 7:36 pm

Re: THEMIS BAR REVIEW Hangout.

Postby dsclaw » Sun Jul 07, 2013 7:14 pm

Spoiler: Contracts

A plastics manufacturer saw an advertisement for a plastic extruding machine. The manufacturer contacted the seller and made arrangements to inspect the machine at the seller’s place of business. The manufacturer walked around the machine once and stated: “Yes, this looks like what I need.” When the manufacturer asked the price, the seller stated a price that was less than half the amount a similar, functioning, used machine commanded on the market. The manufacturer was surprised at the low price, but did not inquire as to the reason. The seller encouraged the manufacturer to perform a closer inspection before finalizing the purchase and offered to open the motor housing so that the motor could be examined, but the manufacturer declined. The parties completed the sale. The manufacturer transported the extruding machine to his factory. When it arrived, he first learned that the motor was burned out and required complete replacement, as was readily apparent upon visual inspection of it. Replacement of the motor would cost roughly the amount the manufacturer had paid for the machine. The manufacturer contacted the seller to return the machine, but the seller refused. The manufacturer filed suit against the seller.

Will the manufacturer prevail?
A. Yes, because the seller violated the implied warranty of merchantability by selling a machine with a burned-out motor.
B. Yes, because the manufacturer’s unilateral mistake regarding the condition of the machine was caused by the seller.
C. No, because the seller made no claims regarding the operability of the machine.
D. No, because the manufacturer waived any implied warranties by failing to inspect the machine.
Incorrect: Answer choice D is correct. Under UCC Article 2, a warranty of merchantability is implied whenever the seller of goods is a merchant. To be merchantable, goods must be fit for their ordinary purpose and pass without objection in the trade. A breach of this warranty must have been present at the time of the sale. However, if the buyer, before entering into the contract, has examined the goods as fully as the buyer desires, or has refused to examine the goods, there is no implied warranty with respect to defects that an examination would have revealed to the buyer. Here, the manufacturer declined to closely inspect the machine, even after learning of the unusually low sales price. Had he done so, he would have discovered the damaged motor when he opened the motor housing, which the seller had offered to do. Because the manufacturer refused to examine the goods, he waived any implied warranty of merchantability that would have otherwise attached to the sale. Answer choice A is incorrect because the manufacturer waived the implied warranty of merchantability when he declined to inspect the machine. Answer choice B is incorrect because the seller did not cause the manufacturer’s unilateral mistake; rather, the seller offered to open the motor housing, and the manufacturer declined the offer. Answer choice C is incorrect because the warranty of merchantability is implied in all sales of goods and need not be expressly stated by the seller. If the defect could not have been uncovered by a reasonable inspection, the manufacturer would have had a valid claim against the seller for violation of the implied warranty of merchantability, even though the seller had not expressly made any such claims.

Anyone have beef with this question. No where does it suggest the person is a merchant all it says is a seller. I selected C thinking it was the best answer because the party was not a merchant.

GertrudePerkins
Posts: 183
Joined: Wed Jun 08, 2011 9:38 pm

Re: THEMIS BAR REVIEW Hangout.

Postby GertrudePerkins » Sun Jul 07, 2013 7:45 pm

elysiansmiles wrote:Neal Newman for Commercial Paper may be my favorite lecturer so far. He wasn't always the clearest, but he was really personable and tried to make a really boring subject somewhat more interesting. He's the kind of prof I would like to go out for a beer with.
Really? I agree with the "go out for a beer with" part, but I thought he did a pretty mediocre job explaining a topic that many people will likely never have encountered before bar prep. For something like Commercial Paper, I want someone who will provide a lot of context and real world examples so that I can grasp the big picture. Didn't feel like I got that. He basically just read the handouts. But hey, I'm happy that other people found him more useful than I did.

User avatar
HETPE3B
Posts: 126
Joined: Tue Jun 21, 2011 12:35 pm

Re: THEMIS BAR REVIEW Hangout.

Postby HETPE3B » Sun Jul 07, 2013 7:59 pm

GertrudePerkins wrote:
elysiansmiles wrote:Neal Newman for Commercial Paper may be my favorite lecturer so far. He wasn't always the clearest, but he was really personable and tried to make a really boring subject somewhat more interesting. He's the kind of prof I would like to go out for a beer with.
Really? I agree with the "go out for a beer with" part, but I thought he did a pretty mediocre job explaining a topic that many people will likely never have encountered before bar prep. For something like Commercial Paper, I want someone who will provide a lot of context and real world examples so that I can grasp the big picture. Didn't feel like I got that. He basically just read the handouts. But hey, I'm happy that other people found him more useful than I did.

I will see you on the other side of the break.

Loved him personally, but must agree with you on him being pretty worthless as far as explaining material (that thankfully wasn't new to me). My other problem with him is essentially blank handouts that he wants you to fill out. Ended up ditching the handout and going with the outline.




Return to “Bar Exam Prep and Discussion Forum”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 3 guests