California Bar Exam (February 2014) thread

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

Re: California Bar Exam (February 2014) thread

Postby a male human » Tue Jan 28, 2014 4:07 pm

El Pollito wrote:You're awesome, 2807.

If in the Bay Area, I'm going to get user 2807 a drink in March.

Open question to everyone: What should be the order of answering the essays--least to most confident subject or vice versa?

This time around, I am consider doing it from my least confident topic to most confident (relative to the other two) to manage my energy. If you knock out the hard ones first, it will be downhill from there, enabling you to take it easier as you get tired in the 2nd or 3rd hour. It will also let you rest longer for the PT.

On the other hand, there's the argument that doing the "easy" ones will warm up your brain and boost your confidence for the other two.

A hybrid approach would be doing the middle-hardest one, then the hardest one, then the easiest one for last. (Hardest meaning your least confident subject overall--you can't tell what the issues will be without wasting time reading all the facts.)

In July, I went straight in order, and the general trend of scores I got back was downward (that 6th torts one killed me). What do you think?

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

Re: California Bar Exam (February 2014) thread

Postby a male human » Tue Jan 28, 2014 4:20 pm

CourtneyElizabeth wrote:While I did well on my essays, I don't feel I'm in ANY position to grade anyone else's or tell them what they might have done better. The ONLY thing I can think of to mention is that you ended with "I think..." and I was always taught that was not correct. Stick to your guns! Instead of "I think that the husband will get the property" say "The husband WILL get the property because...".

Other than that I think we're all in the same boat. Don't forget, I have to retake this garbage too. And whatever you guys do, DON'T look at the pass rate for retakers in Feb. I did that and almost ran out onto the 405.

Agreed. According to Jeff Adachi's Bar Breaker, you shouldn't use any first- or second-person pronouns. Use "X should" or "X will" or just straight "X receives/does/verb..."

But then again model answers often use language like "We now turn to ... the issue of ...." And their answers are always made up of huge paragraphs. Do they just get graders who actually read the answers?

PS: Would anyone get hurt on the 405 with cars going "4 or 5" an hour? :oops:

CourtneyElizabeth
Posts: 310
Joined: Tue Jan 28, 2014 12:22 am

Re: California Bar Exam (February 2014) thread

Postby CourtneyElizabeth » Tue Jan 28, 2014 4:32 pm

Male - I'm CONVINCED they don't read them. A past grader told me they spend MAYBE 45 seconds on our essays. They're paid by the number of essays they read. Hows THAT for incentive?

As for the 405...I'll jump in the HOV lane. That moves a little bit swifter..

User avatar
2807
Posts: 579
Joined: Thu Dec 17, 2009 10:23 pm

Re: California Bar Exam (February 2014) thread

Postby 2807 » Tue Jan 28, 2014 4:45 pm

I believe they do not read them closely.

THAT is why we STRUCTURE them the way I am telling you.

Once they see that awesome flow/format/structure... and see that you:

1. Know the BIG Topics ---- (So... we BOLD this to show them)
2. See the LEGAL ISSUES--- (so.. we underline these and craft it as a legal issue)
3. Address Facts--- (they may skim enough to see you know what you are doing)
4. State the consistent conclusion.. (so.. we use the word "BECAUSE")

You will be home free.
Stay Focused.
Stay Small
Write Strong

My teacher said many times:
"Structure and Form can get you thru ANY essay in a pinch, even if you do not know the law"

But, 5 thick paragraphs of correct legal analysis is a sure-fire way to fail.
Huh, go figure...

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

Re: California Bar Exam (February 2014) thread

Postby a male human » Tue Jan 28, 2014 7:04 pm

Following up on this previous post.
FYR, full post here: viewtopic.php?f=3&t=220409&start=75#p7427178

a male human wrote:The pattern I notice is that the more you write, the worse it becomes. Like know enough prose and see enough connections to be confusing instead of organized within the limited time. If you write well, you probably take the time to organize all your thoughts in more than 1 hour. Trick of the day: Write succinctly and write LESS. Instead of a clusterfuck of information, I now try to separate each element, each issue, making it simple. I don't know if the graders at Kaplan are more generous now, but I've only been getting "green" grades (for all 4 submitted so far). Here is an excerpt from the latest one I submitted (will update with score later):

2006 July Q6 (wills & trusts)
[blah blah]

Check out the 2807's "whether" statements. A Kaplan grader once commented that my issues were easy to follow in an essay full of "whether."

Actually I'm not sure if the above is all that great because I haven't really weaved in "since" and "because" to connect facts to the law, rather than just reciting them.

Seems like "whether" statements work well as issue statements:
Image

I only got a 77.5 for this because my cy pres conclusion was "incorrect"...even though the calbar model answers reach different conclusions. Otherwise I apparently got perfect score on the first interrogatory. 2807, mind taking a look at possible improvements? :) Wish we had spoiler tags so I don't take up so much screen space.

One structural improvement I can add is not making a line break after each of the small formality elements. E.g., I could just say "In writing? Here, the 2003 will is in writing because it was typewritten." Also in this case, perhaps I could underline the element instead of italicize, to make them stand out even more, especially in light of the previous posts pointing out the short time graders spend (in fact, I heard about a grader who grades at red lights instead of texting like normal people). I'm thinking probably not because these subelements can vary depending on how you set up the rule, and it might just confuse the grader.


(1) Whether Nan’s has any rights in Tom’s estate

A beneficiary will take under a will if the will is valid and in force.

Whether the 2003 will is valid

For a will to be valid, the testator must be capable, and the will must meet certain formalities.

Requirements for a will are testator’s intent and capacity. A testator must have the testamentary intent to give away his property. A testator must also have the mental capacity to understand his act, the nature and extent of his property, and his relation to beneficiaries.

Testamentary Intent

Here, Tom had the testamentary to devise his estate in his 2003 will because he had a type written will. He asked his attendant, Lilly, to help him execute it. Furthermore, his will stated a specific amount to his niece, Nan, and left the residue to Happy Home because it “does such important work for the aged who are disabled.” From the language and reasoning contained in the will, his intent to leave his property is clearly shown. Thus, Tom had the testamentary intent to give away his property.

Testamentary Capacity

Tom also had the mental capacity because he understood what he was doing, as shown in his will stating his reason for giving the residue of his estate to Happy Home. He knew the nature and extent of his property because he had a million-dollar estate and left $100,000 to Nan, which is within the limit of his estate. He also understood his relation to his beneficiaries Nan and Happy Home because he called Nan his “niece,” and he had charitable reasons for leaving the rest of his estate to Happy Home. Thus, Tom had testamentary capacity.

Will Formalities

A formally attested will is a will that is subscribed by two disinterested witnesses, and it has specific formalities to be a valid will. It must 1) be in writing, 2) signed by testator or by another at testator’s direction and presence, 3) signed or acknowledged in the joint presence of at least two disinterested witnesses, 4) signed by at least two disinterested witnesses within the testator’s lifetime, and 5) the witnesses understand that the instrument they witness is the testator’s will.

A disinterested witness is a witness who is not named as a beneficiary in the will. A disinterested witness will create a rebuttable presumption of undue influence.

In writing?

Here, the 2003 will is in writing because it was typewritten.

Signed by testator?

Here, the 2003 will was signed properly because Tom directed Lilly to sign his name under his direction and in his presence. Since this is an acceptable alternative to the testator’s direct signature, it is considered to be signed.

Signed in joint presence of two witnesses?

Here, the 2003 will was signed by Lilly and another attendant signed as witnesses in the presence of each other, so it was signed in the joint presence of at least two disinterested witnesses. Since neither is a beneficiary under the will, neither is a disinterested witness that invalidates this formal requirement.

Signed within Tom’s lifetime?

Here, the will was signed by Lilly and the other attendant at Tom’s request. Since he was alive, it was signed within Tom’s lifetime; this formal requirement is met.

Witnesses understood?

Here, the will was named “my will,” so the other attendant understood the document was his will. Lilly also understood it because she helped Tom execute his will.

Therefore, the attested will was validly executed.

Whether the 2003 will was revoked by the 2004 will

A subsequent instrument can cancel a prior will by explicit or implicit revocation. It can be implicitly revoked by inconsistent terms in the new will.

Will Formalities

See above for formal requirements for an attested will.

In writing?

Here, the 2004 will is in writing because it was typed by Lilly.

Signed by testator?

Here, the 2004 will was signed properly because Tom signed his name at the end of the document.

Signed in joint presence of two witnesses?

Here, the 2004 will was signed by the first attendant and the second attendant alone and separately. Lilly was not present when they each signed the document alone. Thus, the 2004 will was not signed in the joint presence of two witnesses.

Signed within Tom’s lifetime?

Here, the will was signed by the two attendants in Tom’s presence. Since he was alive, it was signed within Tom’s lifetime; this formal requirement is met.

Witnesses understood?

Here, Tom explained the purpose of the document to the first witness but not in the presence of the second witness. Thus, the first attendant understood the purpose, but it is unclear whether the second did.

Nonetheless, the joint presence requirement is not met, so this will is invalid. Therefore, the 2004 will was not a valid revocation of the 2003 will.

Dependent relative revocation

DRR is a doctrine that allows a testator to cancel an earlier revocation if he believed that another disposition would be effective, and but for his mistaken belief in the law or facts, he would not have revoked the first will. However, DRR is not applied where the revoking will is not legally valid.

Here, the 2004 will was not validly executed. Thus, it could not have validly revoked the 2003 will. Therefore, DRR is not applicable, and the 2003 will remains in force.

In sum, since the 2003 will remains effective, so is the gift to Nan. Nan takes the $100,000 from Tom.

User avatar
zeth006
Posts: 1167
Joined: Tue May 12, 2009 2:54 am

Re: California Bar Exam (February 2014) thread

Postby zeth006 » Tue Jan 28, 2014 7:14 pm

One other question I have. For racking up points, do we also need to address issues that wind up with a conclusion that so-and-so isn't liable?

User avatar
MURPH
Posts: 854
Joined: Wed Dec 10, 2008 12:20 am

Re: California Bar Exam (February 2014) thread

Postby MURPH » Tue Jan 28, 2014 7:46 pm

CourtneyElizabeth wrote:WELP, after reading everyones posts for a while, I figured I'd register.
I'm studying for the Feb 2014 CA bar exam after failing the July 2013 by about 30 points. Might as well have been 1000.
I STILL can't shake the feeling of absolute dread about this test, or get my confidence up at all.

Help. Please. I'm kind of flailing about because I don't have a schedule to adhere to and I'm not going along with Kaplan this time (can you blame me?!).
I have Critical Pass MBE flash cards, some great outlines for the non MBE topics... SEE?! Told you I needed help!

Courtney if you want to see a schedule, here is mine. I've hit the MBE topics pretty hard for the last month. So what follows is light on those areas. On the PT days I do two PTs, One in the morning and one later and spend about an hour reviewing. For all he essays I spend time afterwards comparing my answers to those on baressays.com . At this point I pretty much only look at the top two essays.

I also work in at least 25 MBE questions. Unless it is an MBE day, in which case I do 100 or more under timed conditions. The MBE days are light days, with 4 hours of studying. I am doing no work on Monday Feb 24th. I also have some flexibility at the end. Additionally, I try to do some general prepping each day like reading this thread, reading some of the commercial books or whatever. But not too much of that. My main focus is on doing the essays, doing the MBE questions and analyzing the results.

Jan 28, 29 & 30 = Community Property
Jan 30 = one Performance test
Jan 31, Feb 1 = MBE
Feb 2, 3 = Wills and trusts
Feb4 & 5 = Business Associations.
Feb 6, 7, 8 = Professional Responsibility
Feb 9 , 10 = Civ Pro
Feb 11,12 = Remedies
Feb 13, 14, 15 = Performance Review
Feb 16, 17 = nothing scheduled
Feb 18 = K
Feb 19 = Con Law
Feb 20 = Property
Feb 21 = Torts
Feb 22 = Evidence
Feb 23 = Crim / Crim Pro

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

Re: California Bar Exam (February 2014) thread

Postby a male human » Tue Jan 28, 2014 7:46 pm

zeth006 wrote:One other question I have. For racking up points, do we also need to address issues that wind up with a conclusion that so-and-so isn't liable?

I would say...if it's relevant (or asked by the interrogatory), sure. (kind of like in the above sample: DRR was relevant as something a party could argue)

If you want to set up a straw man just for the sake of raising issues that aren't there, maybe quickly address it only it's somehow related? Otherwise you could raise every testable issue on the bar and dismiss it.
Last edited by a male human on Tue Jan 28, 2014 8:29 pm, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
2807
Posts: 579
Joined: Thu Dec 17, 2009 10:23 pm

Re: California Bar Exam (February 2014) thread

Postby 2807 » Tue Jan 28, 2014 8:08 pm

a male human wrote:Following up on this previous post.
FYR, full post here: viewtopic.php?f=3&t=220409&start=75#p7427178

a male human wrote:The pattern I notice is that the more you write, the worse it becomes. Like know enough prose and see enough connections to be confusing instead of organized within the limited time. If you write well, you probably take the time to organize all your thoughts in more than 1 hour. Trick of the day: Write succinctly and write LESS. Instead of a clusterfuck of information, I now try to separate each element, each issue, making it simple. I don't know if the graders at Kaplan are more generous now, but I've only been getting "green" grades (for all 4 submitted so far). Here is an excerpt from the latest one I submitted (will update with score later):

2006 July Q6 (wills & trusts)
[blah blah]

Check out the 2807's "whether" statements. A Kaplan grader once commented that my issues were easy to follow in an essay full of "whether."

Actually I'm not sure if the above is all that great because I haven't really weaved in "since" and "because" to connect facts to the law, rather than just reciting them.

Seems like "whether" statements work well as issue statements:
Image

I only got a 77.5 for this because my cy pres conclusion was "incorrect"...even though the calbar model answers reach different conclusions. Otherwise I apparently got perfect score on the first interrogatory. 2807, mind taking a look at possible improvements? :) Wish we had spoiler tags so I don't take up so much screen space.

One structural improvement I can add is not making a line break after each of the small formality elements. E.g., I could just say "In writing? Here, the 2003 will is in writing because it was typewritten." Also in this case, perhaps I could underline the element instead of italicize, to make them stand out even more, especially in light of the previous posts pointing out the short time graders spend (in fact, I heard about a grader who grades at red lights instead of texting like normal people). I'm thinking probably not because these subelements can vary depending on how you set up the rule, and it might just confuse the grader.


(1) Whether Nan’s has any rights in Tom’s estate

A beneficiary will take under a will if the will is valid and in force.

Whether the 2003 will is valid
For a will to be valid, the testator must be capable, and the will must meet certain formalities.

Requirements for a will are testator’s intent and capacity. A testator must have the testamentary intent to give away his property. A testator must also have the mental capacity to understand his act, the nature and extent of his property, and his relation to beneficiaries.

Testamentary Intent

Here, Tom had the testamentary to devise his estate in his 2003 will because he had a type written will. He asked his attendant, Lilly, to help him execute it. Furthermore, his will stated a specific amount to his niece, Nan, and left the residue to Happy Home because it “does such important work for the aged who are disabled.” From the language and reasoning contained in the will, his intent to leave his property is clearly shown. Thus, Tom had the testamentary intent to give away his property.

Testamentary Capacity

Tom also had the mental capacity because he understood what he was doing, as shown in his will stating his reason for giving the residue of his estate to Happy Home. He knew the nature and extent of his property because he had a million-dollar estate and left $100,000 to Nan, which is within the limit of his estate. He also understood his relation to his beneficiaries Nan and Happy Home because he called Nan his “niece,” and he had charitable reasons for leaving the rest of his estate to Happy Home. Thus, Tom had testamentary capacity.

Will Formalities

A formally attested will is a will that is subscribed by two disinterested witnesses, and it has specific formalities to be a valid will. It must 1) be in writing, 2) signed by testator or by another at testator’s direction and presence, 3) signed or acknowledged in the joint presence of at least two disinterested witnesses, 4) signed by at least two disinterested witnesses within the testator’s lifetime, and 5) the witnesses understand that the instrument they witness is the testator’s will.

A disinterested witness is a witness who is not named as a beneficiary in the will. A disinterested witness will create a rebuttable presumption of undue influence.

In writing?

Here, the 2003 will is in writing because it was typewritten.

Signed by testator?

Here, the 2003 will was signed properly because Tom directed Lilly to sign his name under his direction and in his presence. Since this is an acceptable alternative to the testator’s direct signature, it is considered to be signed.

Signed in joint presence of two witnesses?

Here, the 2003 will was signed by Lilly and another attendant signed as witnesses in the presence of each other, so it was signed in the joint presence of at least two disinterested witnesses. Since neither is a beneficiary under the will, neither is a disinterested witness that invalidates this formal requirement.

Signed within Tom’s lifetime?

Here, the will was signed by Lilly and the other attendant at Tom’s request. Since he was alive, it was signed within Tom’s lifetime; this formal requirement is met.

Witnesses understood?

Here, the will was named “my will,” so the other attendant understood the document was his will. Lilly also understood it because she helped Tom execute his will.

Therefore, the attested will was validly executed.

Whether the 2003 will was revoked by the 2004 will

A subsequent instrument can cancel a prior will by explicit or implicit revocation. It can be implicitly revoked by inconsistent terms in the new will.

Will Formalities

See above for formal requirements for an attested will.

In writing?

Here, the 2004 will is in writing because it was typed by Lilly.

Signed by testator?

Here, the 2004 will was signed properly because Tom signed his name at the end of the document.

Signed in joint presence of two witnesses?

Here, the 2004 will was signed by the first attendant and the second attendant alone and separately. Lilly was not present when they each signed the document alone. Thus, the 2004 will was not signed in the joint presence of two witnesses.

Signed within Tom’s lifetime?

Here, the will was signed by the two attendants in Tom’s presence. Since he was alive, it was signed within Tom’s lifetime; this formal requirement is met.

Witnesses understood?

Here, Tom explained the purpose of the document to the first witness but not in the presence of the second witness. Thus, the first attendant understood the purpose, but it is unclear whether the second did.

Nonetheless, the joint presence requirement is not met, so this will is invalid. Therefore, the 2004 will was not a valid revocation of the 2003 will.

Dependent relative revocation

DRR is a doctrine that allows a testator to cancel an earlier revocation if he believed that another disposition would be effective, and but for his mistaken belief in the law or facts, he would not have revoked the first will. However, DRR is not applied where the revoking will is not legally valid.

Here, the 2004 will was not validly executed. Thus, it could not have validly revoked the 2003 will. Therefore, DRR is not applicable, and the 2003 will remains in force.

In sum, since the 2003 will remains effective, so is the gift to Nan. Nan takes the $100,000 from Tom.




Pretty good !
BLL check: Is typed the same as handwritten?? You say: "It is in writing because it was typed..." Are you sure about that? Im not.

As far as form:
It is good.
Under "whether the 2003 will is valid" it may be clearer to craft one all-inclusive sentence that serves as a road map for the following analysis
like this:



Nan's rights to Tom's Estate
Nan, as a beneficiary, will take from the will if the will is valid.

1. Whether the 2003 Will is Valid so that Nan will take from it:

For a will to be valid the T must have intent, capacity, and the will must meet certain formalities:

Testamentary Intent:
blahblahblah

Testamentary Capacity
blahblhablha

Will Formalities
BLAHBLAH


Basically this is what you did. GOOD !
I can see that w/o the question in front of me it is hard to know if something desires more IMPACT and its own "whether" IRAC treatment.

Overall, you can see your structure and you are above the curve now !

You have a lot under one big "Whether" and that concerns me.
Don't be afraid to break it down more IF IF IF that is the issue/direction the essay/prompts require.

Technically, the Intent + Capacity + and Formalities can be "whether" statements. It is an IRAC that you are doing....
Just remember, by using "whether" you are helping your brain to understand that you are SOLVING an issue !

You solve that with stating the RULE and the FACTS that apply.
So-- you are on thin ice when you just say "testamentary intent" and start writing, because you will likely NOT state an issue, and a rule, and facts.... You will make the sin of cramming it all into one big "conclusion" ! DONT DO THAT !

And, folks, that is why we DRILL DRILL DRILL on "whether" statements to lead us off !

They force you to IRAC.

So, you can do it this way that you have, just beware of CONCLUSIONARY traps !

CourtneyElizabeth
Posts: 310
Joined: Tue Jan 28, 2014 12:22 am

Re: California Bar Exam (February 2014) thread

Postby CourtneyElizabeth » Wed Jan 29, 2014 1:57 pm

2807 wrote:So, you can do it this way that you have, just beware of CONCLUSIONARY traps !


Conclusionary traps?

Also, MURPH - thanks. I'm gonna work on Comm Prop today and attempt to follow your game plan while doing as many MBE questions as humanly possible.

Oh and, love the Doctor Who avatar.

User avatar
zeth006
Posts: 1167
Joined: Tue May 12, 2009 2:54 am

Re: California Bar Exam (February 2014) thread

Postby zeth006 » Wed Jan 29, 2014 2:42 pm

So what do you guys think of Barmax's MBE app? Worth it? $99 at the moment.

User avatar
2807
Posts: 579
Joined: Thu Dec 17, 2009 10:23 pm

Re: California Bar Exam (February 2014) thread

Postby 2807 » Wed Jan 29, 2014 2:45 pm

CourtneyElizabeth wrote:
2807 wrote:So, you can do it this way that you have, just beware of CONCLUSIONARY traps !


Conclusionary traps?

Also, MURPH - thanks. I'm gonna work on Comm Prop today and attempt to follow your game plan while doing as many MBE questions as humanly possible.

Oh and, love the Doctor Who avatar.



Conlusionary trap: If you merely state the "Topic" instead of conditioning your mind to state a "LEGAL ISSUE" you may risk writing a conclusionary paragraph that does not clearly set out the issue, the law, and the facts that matter.

That is why I am not a fan of "topic" only. You are safer if you write a "whether" statement. It forces you to state the rule next and the facts that matter.

Merely stating a "topic" and writing a nice paragraph/analyisis is NOT as IMPACTFUL to the grader and you risk losing your way due to your (lack of) form !

This lesson is for folks who want a FORM to drive them through the essays.
It works.
Use it.

Busyvee
Posts: 32
Joined: Wed Jan 29, 2014 1:51 pm

Re: California Bar Exam (February 2014) thread

Postby Busyvee » Wed Jan 29, 2014 4:01 pm

A male human,

I am shocked, your answers to contracts,CP and torts deserved at least 60s if not more.
My answers were terrible and shorter, compared to yours and I've got 60s. I am not even talking about my awful grammar, English is my second language.

How are they grading those essays!!!???
wtf!
I am sorry I can't share my essays,they were handwritten, and I am embarrassed to show them, but trust me they are much worst than yours.

User avatar
El Pollito
party fowl
Posts: 17901
Joined: Tue Jul 16, 2013 2:11 pm

Re: California Bar Exam (February 2014) thread

Postby El Pollito » Wed Jan 29, 2014 4:20 pm

Reading one of July 2013 Wills essays that got a 70 (on baressays.com). It starts talking about holographic wills when the instrument was typed and clearly not a holographic will. Are we supposed to do stuff like that?

CourtneyElizabeth
Posts: 310
Joined: Tue Jan 28, 2014 12:22 am

Re: California Bar Exam (February 2014) thread

Postby CourtneyElizabeth » Wed Jan 29, 2014 4:22 pm

El - yeah I don't get that. I was always told if something isn't there don't talk about it. Maybe it depends on the grader??

User avatar
2807
Posts: 579
Joined: Thu Dec 17, 2009 10:23 pm

Re: California Bar Exam (February 2014) thread

Postby 2807 » Wed Jan 29, 2014 4:23 pm

Busyvee wrote:A male human,

I am shocked, your answers to contracts,CP and torts deserved at least 60s if not more.
My answers were terrible and shorter, compared to yours and I've got 60s. I am not even talking about my awful grammar, English is my second language.

How are they grading those essays!!!???
wtf!
I am sorry I can't share my essays,they were handwritten, and I am embarrassed to show them, but trust me they are much worst than yours.



Oh, just wait. He has a new trick in his bag now.
You ain't seen nothin' yet.... !

I looked at your old ones. They make me sad.
You needed STRUCTURE and IMPACT on the grader and you may have pulled it off !

Now, you have been exposed to a new approach.
Same law , but new style !

Go get'm


One more time...

TOPIC
* "Topic Sentence" as road map (if worthy..)

Then--- ** Small BLL Blurbs that universally apply to Topic/issues
Underline KEY WORDS to add IMPACT

(START IRAC HERE)
1. WHETHER.....(ISSUE stated as LEGAL ISSUE)

RULE
FACT
also, FACT
additionally, FACT

Conclusion: Therefore, BECAUSE____________


2. Whether.... (Issue, stated as LEGAL ISSUE)

RULE
FACT
also, FACT
additionally, FACT

Conclusion: Therefore, BECAUSE _______________

3. Repeat... all issues under THIS TOPIC.


Start NEW TOPIC
and keep on trucking'...

Busyvee
Posts: 32
Joined: Wed Jan 29, 2014 1:51 pm

Re: California Bar Exam (February 2014) thread

Postby Busyvee » Wed Jan 29, 2014 4:28 pm

The grading is completely arbitrary, I mean there must be some standards...
Something needs to be done!

Busyvee
Posts: 32
Joined: Wed Jan 29, 2014 1:51 pm

Re: California Bar Exam (February 2014) thread

Postby Busyvee » Wed Jan 29, 2014 4:35 pm

2807 wrote:
Busyvee wrote:A male human,

I am shocked, your answers to contracts,CP and torts deserved at least 60s if not more.
My answers were terrible and shorter, compared to yours and I've got 60s. I am not even talking about my awful grammar, English is my second language.

How are they grading those essays!!!???
wtf!
I am sorry I can't share my essays,they were handwritten, and I am embarrassed to show them, but trust me they are much worst than yours.



Oh, just wait. He has a new trick in his bag now.
You ain't seen nothin' yet.... !

I looked at your old ones. They make me sad.
You needed STRUCTURE and IMPACT on the grader and you may have pulled it off !

Now, you have been exposed to a new approach.
Same law , but new style !

Go get'm


One more time...

TOPIC
* "Topic Sentence" as road map (if worthy..)

Then--- ** Small BLL Blurbs that universally apply to Topic/issues
Underline KEY WORDS to add IMPACT

(START IRAC HERE)
1. WHETHER.....(ISSUE stated as LEGAL ISSUE)

RULE
FACT
also, FACT
additionally, FACT

Conclusion: Therefore, BECAUSE____________


2. Whether.... (Issue, stated as LEGAL ISSUE)

RULE
FACT
also, FACT
additionally, FACT

Conclusion: Therefore, BECAUSE _______________

3. Repeat... all issues under THIS TOPIC.


Start NEW TOPIC
and keep on trucking'...

Ok,
Than how come my essays that lacked structure, but still got 60s?

User avatar
2807
Posts: 579
Joined: Thu Dec 17, 2009 10:23 pm

Re: California Bar Exam (February 2014) thread

Postby 2807 » Wed Jan 29, 2014 4:37 pm

Busyvee wrote:
2807 wrote:
Busyvee wrote:A male human,

I am shocked, your answers to contracts,CP and torts deserved at least 60s if not more.
My answers were terrible and shorter, compared to yours and I've got 60s. I am not even talking about my awful grammar, English is my second language.

How are they grading those essays!!!???
wtf!
I am sorry I can't share my essays,they were handwritten, and I am embarrassed to show them, but trust me they are much worst than yours.



Oh, just wait. He has a new trick in his bag now.
You ain't seen nothin' yet.... !

I looked at your old ones. They make me sad.
You needed STRUCTURE and IMPACT on the grader and you may have pulled it off !

Now, you have been exposed to a new approach.
Same law , but new style !

Go get'm


One more time...

TOPIC
* "Topic Sentence" as road map (if worthy..)

Then--- ** Small BLL Blurbs that universally apply to Topic/issues
Underline KEY WORDS to add IMPACT

(START IRAC HERE)
1. WHETHER.....(ISSUE stated as LEGAL ISSUE)

RULE
FACT
also, FACT
additionally, FACT

Conclusion: Therefore, BECAUSE____________


2. Whether.... (Issue, stated as LEGAL ISSUE)

RULE
FACT
also, FACT
additionally, FACT

Conclusion: Therefore, BECAUSE _______________

3. Repeat... all issues under THIS TOPIC.


Start NEW TOPIC
and keep on trucking'...

Ok,
Than how come my essays that lacked structure, but still got 60s?


Because you are awesome.

User avatar
El Pollito
party fowl
Posts: 17901
Joined: Tue Jul 16, 2013 2:11 pm

Re: California Bar Exam (February 2014) thread

Postby El Pollito » Wed Jan 29, 2014 4:38 pm

:lol:

User avatar
2807
Posts: 579
Joined: Thu Dec 17, 2009 10:23 pm

Re: California Bar Exam (February 2014) thread

Postby 2807 » Wed Jan 29, 2014 4:40 pm

Busyvee wrote:The grading is completely arbitrary, I mean there must be some standards...
Something needs to be done!


Tell us how these are graded

Busyvee
Posts: 32
Joined: Wed Jan 29, 2014 1:51 pm

Re: California Bar Exam (February 2014) thread

Postby Busyvee » Wed Jan 29, 2014 4:43 pm

very funny.
I mean seriously, what should we do?
so many freaking approaches, go figure ... :evil:

Busyvee
Posts: 32
Joined: Wed Jan 29, 2014 1:51 pm

Re: California Bar Exam (February 2014) thread

Postby Busyvee » Wed Jan 29, 2014 4:44 pm

2807 wrote:
Busyvee wrote:The grading is completely arbitrary, I mean there must be some standards...
Something needs to be done!


Tell us how these are graded

I wish I knew...

User avatar
2807
Posts: 579
Joined: Thu Dec 17, 2009 10:23 pm

Re: California Bar Exam (February 2014) thread

Postby 2807 » Wed Jan 29, 2014 5:04 pm

Busyvee wrote:
2807 wrote:
Busyvee wrote:The grading is completely arbitrary, I mean there must be some standards...
Something needs to be done!


Tell us how these are graded

I wish I knew...


I do know.
It is not arbitrary.
It is quite structured.
They have classes on how to score.
Close scores get independently reviewed.
On that review, if major discrepancies, you get another/final review.

The "arbitrary" part is when YOUR grader reads your essay for the FIRST time.
THAT is where you HAVE to take advantage of the chance to "seduce" him and make him see you got it.
He will skim fast. He already has a checklist of issues.
Show them to him in BOLD.
State the Law next. Clearly
Show a consistent pattern of using FACTS and APPLYING them
Have a conclusion that is clear.


Use BOLD, underline, and S P A C E .... to create an easy flow of greatness.

DO NOT: Write a fantastic 5 paragraph essay.

Certainly people pass doing it multiple ways. But, this is a tried and true method to show the grader the goods!
And, it also helps you by making you SEE ISSUES correctly, and use the law and facts that apply.

If it weren't for this "form" then this whole thing would be about BLL.
That is too easy.
You all know the BLL god enough.
Form/Delivery is a part of getting the PASSING GRADE
Because, yes, they will fly through it....

Knowing the law is not enough.
You have to stand and deliver !
Use this form. Have a happy summer !
Period.

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

Re: California Bar Exam (February 2014) thread

Postby a male human » Wed Jan 29, 2014 5:22 pm

2807 wrote:
Busyvee wrote:
2807 wrote:
Busyvee wrote:A male human,

I am shocked, your answers to contracts,CP and torts deserved at least 60s if not more.
My answers were terrible and shorter, compared to yours and I've got 60s. I am not even talking about my awful grammar, English is my second language.

How are they grading those essays!!!???
wtf!
I am sorry I can't share my essays,they were handwritten, and I am embarrassed to show them, but trust me they are much worst than yours.



Oh, just wait. He has a new trick in his bag now.
You ain't seen nothin' yet.... !

I looked at your old ones. They make me sad.
You needed STRUCTURE and IMPACT on the grader and you may have pulled it off !

Now, you have been exposed to a new approach.
Same law , but new style !

Go get'm


One more time...

TOPIC
* "Topic Sentence" as road map (if worthy..)

Then--- ** Small BLL Blurbs that universally apply to Topic/issues
Underline KEY WORDS to add IMPACT

(START IRAC HERE)
1. WHETHER.....(ISSUE stated as LEGAL ISSUE)

RULE
FACT
also, FACT
additionally, FACT

Conclusion: Therefore, BECAUSE____________


2. Whether.... (Issue, stated as LEGAL ISSUE)

RULE
FACT
also, FACT
additionally, FACT

Conclusion: Therefore, BECAUSE _______________

3. Repeat... all issues under THIS TOPIC.


Start NEW TOPIC
and keep on trucking'...

Ok,
Than how come my essays that lacked structure, but still got 60s?


Because you are awesome.

I wanna be awesome too! Maybe handwritten answers are graded differently? But if someone thought I deserved at least 60s, I guess that makes me feel better that it could have been an arbitrary fluke.

Alas, all throughout my life, I had a tendency to have to not get the results I want the first time.

MPRE? Failed by 2 points the first time
Piano recitals? Get to the end and forget the last few measures and have to redo it (doesn't help that I'm usually the last one to go)
SAT? Took it 4 times
College major? Part of the first class to enroll in the newly established major and be beta testers (the 30 people who stayed anyway)

LSAT? Should not have taken it (or taken it more than once to go to a better school) and continued my peaceful life

Hopefully I make this the last time.
Last edited by a male human on Wed Jan 29, 2014 5:34 pm, edited 3 times in total.




Return to “Bar Exam Prep and Discussion Forum”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: amonthofsundays, ndp1234 and 5 guests