2015 February California Bar Exam

cndounda1985
Posts: 78
Joined: Thu Dec 04, 2014 2:31 am

Re: 2015 February California Bar Exam

Postby cndounda1985 » Mon Feb 16, 2015 10:11 pm

CourtneyElizabeth wrote:I'm pretty sure they can't reinitiate without counsel there.
But afterwards they can ask about an unrelated crime...



thank you

ringdabell
Posts: 84
Joined: Tue Nov 23, 2010 6:43 pm

Re: 2015 February California Bar Exam

Postby ringdabell » Tue Feb 17, 2015 12:07 am

I am an out of state applicant taking the exam in Oakland center. Does anyone know if there is any place there that I can put my laptop bag? Also should I pack lunch too or anyone knows any place nearby to get lunch?
Thanks.

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

Re: 2015 February California Bar Exam

Postby CourtneyElizabeth » Tue Feb 17, 2015 12:25 am

I eft stuff outside the test room. There are a bunch of people working there and there was actually security at the hotel I took it at in Century City. I think you'll be fine just leaving it outside the room.

User avatar
a male human
Posts: 1678
Joined: Tue Mar 31, 2009 2:42 pm

Re: 2015 February California Bar Exam

Postby a male human » Tue Feb 17, 2015 1:41 am

barexamcollector wrote:Fuck this guy. I've passed two other states easily and the patent bar… California is just a bit more "unpredictable"

2807 wrote:Hi folks,

I have been reading and watching, and thought I would share what I did prior to the exam:

In one word: FILTER

Then try this:
1. Read through your outline and condense

1. Username makes post.

2. Come on dude, are you really comparing the CA bar to the patent bar or any state bar? What does that have anything to do with the quoted post? I don't get what you're trying to say here. CA is unpredictable, so don't filter?

3. 2807 is a legend.
His advice may or may not work for everyone, but the key here (and anywhere else, really) is asking, "Is there a way I can apply this to my own situation?"

cndounda1985
Posts: 78
Joined: Thu Dec 04, 2014 2:31 am

Re: 2015 February California Bar Exam

Postby cndounda1985 » Tue Feb 17, 2015 1:48 am

ringdabell wrote:I am an out of state applicant taking the exam in Oakland center. Does anyone know if there is any place there that I can put my laptop bag? Also should I pack lunch too or anyone knows any place nearby to get lunch?
Thanks.








Yes, at the Oakland center everyone leaves their stuff right outside of the doors. You can leave them near the doors where you will be seating. That's what i did last february and my stuff was fine.

morescotchplease
Posts: 91
Joined: Fri Jan 30, 2015 12:46 am

Re: 2015 February California Bar Exam

Postby morescotchplease » Tue Feb 17, 2015 3:44 am

anyone have any helpful info re: Ontario testing center?

melvinIII
Posts: 45
Joined: Mon Nov 24, 2014 8:55 pm

Re: 2015 February California Bar Exam

Postby melvinIII » Tue Feb 17, 2015 10:00 am

Hey, gang. On the essays I have only been discussing CA law distinctions if the prompt specifically acts for it. I just had a professional responsibility essay graded though and I didn't discuss CA law because the question did not say to, but the grader destroyed me for not talking about CA distinctions.

What's your approach on this? I knew the CA distinctions so I don't want to miss easy points, but I thought if the questions doesn't say "answer according to CA and ABA" or something like that we aren't supposed to discuss CA?

mhub172
Posts: 18
Joined: Mon Nov 24, 2014 6:40 pm

Re: 2015 February California Bar Exam

Postby mhub172 » Tue Feb 17, 2015 11:22 am

melvinIII wrote:Hey, gang. On the essays I have only been discussing CA law distinctions if the prompt specifically acts for it. I just had a professional responsibility essay graded though and I didn't discuss CA law because the question did not say to, but the grader destroyed me for not talking about CA distinctions.

What's your approach on this? I knew the CA distinctions so I don't want to miss easy points, but I thought if the questions doesn't say "answer according to CA and ABA" or something like that we aren't supposed to discuss CA?


I would say for prof responsibility, ALWAYS discuss distinctions, regardless of the prompt. But for Evidence or Civ Pro, I wouldn't discuss distinctions unless the prompt asks for it.

mhub172
Posts: 18
Joined: Mon Nov 24, 2014 6:40 pm

Re: 2015 February California Bar Exam

Postby mhub172 » Tue Feb 17, 2015 11:24 am

cndounda1985 wrote:
ringdabell wrote:I am an out of state applicant taking the exam in Oakland center. Does anyone know if there is any place there that I can put my laptop bag? Also should I pack lunch too or anyone knows any place nearby to get lunch?
Thanks.








Yes, at the Oakland center everyone leaves their stuff right outside of the doors. You can leave them near the doors where you will be seating. That's what i did last february and my stuff was fine.


Second on this, can leave stuff right outside the doors. Lots of people did it. Also, for lunch, I packed my own and then sat outside on some grassy areas and ate. This helped me stay away from people who liked to chat about the exam and let me have a mental break/prepare for the afternoon session.

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

Re: 2015 February California Bar Exam

Postby CourtneyElizabeth » Tue Feb 17, 2015 12:20 pm

morescotchplease wrote:anyone have any helpful info re: Ontario testing center?


Wear earplugs. It is just a a huge gymnasium and all the little noises were amplified so it was loud. The entrances to the bathrooms were in the giant room too. There's a little cafe stand to get a coffee or whatever and a small concession stand too. There's stuff nearby though, like a little pizza place and I think a sandwich shop? But I'd plan ahead bc lines get long. If you're staying in one of the nearby hotels just walk to your room and quietly eat lunch alone and decompress.

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

Re: 2015 February California Bar Exam

Postby CourtneyElizabeth » Tue Feb 17, 2015 1:13 pm

a male human wrote:
barexamcollector wrote:Fuck this guy. I've passed two other states easily and the patent bar… California is just a bit more "unpredictable"

2807 wrote:Hi folks,

I have been reading and watching, and thought I would share what I did prior to the exam:

In one word: FILTER

Then try this:
1. Read through your outline and condense

1. Username makes post.

2. Come on dude, are you really comparing the CA bar to the patent bar or any state bar? What does that have anything to do with the quoted post? I don't get what you're trying to say here. CA is unpredictable, so don't filter?

3. 2807 is a legend.
His advice may or may not work for everyone, but the key here (and anywhere else, really) is asking, "Is there a way I can apply this to my own situation?"


Yeah I wasn't sure about this one either...

User avatar
zabagabe
Posts: 340
Joined: Sun Jul 01, 2007 3:48 am

Re: 2015 February California Bar Exam

Postby zabagabe » Tue Feb 17, 2015 1:52 pm

Alright team, if civ pro appears and it's CA-specific, I'm just gonna have to make the points up someplace else. I just don't see myself memorizing all of this in a week given everything else. Let's pray it doesn't happen!

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

Re: 2015 February California Bar Exam

Postby CourtneyElizabeth » Tue Feb 17, 2015 2:15 pm

Just remember Anti-SLAPP and whatever other big CA specific areas there are that I can't think of right now. *Brain Dead*

gaagoots
Posts: 212
Joined: Thu Oct 21, 2010 12:01 am

Re: 2015 February California Bar Exam

Postby gaagoots » Tue Feb 17, 2015 3:41 pm

zabagabe wrote:Alright team, if civ pro appears and it's CA-specific, I'm just gonna have to make the points up someplace else. I just don't see myself memorizing all of this in a week given everything else. Let's pray it doesn't happen!


I would be surprised seeing an Anti-SLAPP, it would seem more likely in a PT under the *fake* laws of Columbia.

However, most of you could easily bullshit defective service of process and come up with the motion to quash and a full PJ analysis.

Fed courts don't have the motion to quash summons, they have the lame rule 12 and I didn't even know until studying for the bar that 'special appearances' are no longer applicable in Fed Court, since 2011.

I practiced this really old 1987 one on Sunday--closest thing I could find, but I changed it from Muni Court to Superior Court (Limited/Unlimited).

They will get you in res judicata for primary rights for CA. Otherwise it wasn't terrible.

https://sites.google.com/site/easybarpa ... exams/1987

s1m4
Posts: 202
Joined: Tue Jan 12, 2010 10:04 pm

Re: 2015 February California Bar Exam

Postby s1m4 » Tue Feb 17, 2015 5:14 pm

For memorizing "rule slap-downs" (credit Sakai) I found this site to be helpful: http://www.productivity501.com/how-to-m ... -text/294/

There is a text converter on there -- You basically enter text (your rule), and then it splices away all the letters from each word except the first letter. Then you read the text and try to recall the statement. It helped me get commit some dry stuff to memory (attorney withdrawal exceptions) and other rule statements these past few days.

I have a long text file with the headings (DORMANT COMMERCE CLAUSE) and then the converted text which I go through and try to rerwrite the rule statement, and then only refer to the conviser if Im totally at loss.

redblueyellow
Posts: 465
Joined: Sun Jan 11, 2015 9:50 pm

Re: 2015 February California Bar Exam

Postby redblueyellow » Tue Feb 17, 2015 5:55 pm

s1m4 wrote:For memorizing "rule slap-downs" (credit Sakai) I found this site to be helpful: http://www.productivity501.com/how-to-m ... -text/294/

There is a text converter on there -- You basically enter text (your rule), and then it splices away all the letters from each word except the first letter. Then you read the text and try to recall the statement. It helped me get commit some dry stuff to memory (attorney withdrawal exceptions) and other rule statements these past few days.

I have a long text file with the headings (DORMANT COMMERCE CLAUSE) and then the converted text which I go through and try to rerwrite the rule statement, and then only refer to the conviser if Im totally at loss.


I looked at this, but I'm confused. Are you supposed to have the random string in front of you to start recalling or are you supposed to memorize the letters?

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

Re: 2015 February California Bar Exam

Postby CourtneyElizabeth » Tue Feb 17, 2015 7:17 pm

gaagoots wrote:
zabagabe wrote:They will get you in res judicata for primary rights for CA. Otherwise it wasn't terrible.



Res judicata for primary rights for CA?

ringdabell
Posts: 84
Joined: Tue Nov 23, 2010 6:43 pm

Re: 2015 February California Bar Exam

Postby ringdabell » Tue Feb 17, 2015 7:26 pm

Does anyone know if we can bring our luggage to the exam center (Oakland Convention Center) and leave it there?

User avatar
bb8900
Posts: 91
Joined: Mon May 17, 2010 11:33 pm

Re: 2015 February California Bar Exam

Postby bb8900 » Tue Feb 17, 2015 7:26 pm

Wills and Trusts Question:

An omitted child is one who is born after the execution of the will and is left out. They can still get their cut, barring exceptions for (1) intentional omission of child, (2) $$ left with another parent, or (3) provided for outside of the will.

Is there such a thing as a pretermitted child? I swear I read that somewhere, but cannot find it now! It is basically a child who is born before the will was made, but still not in it (for whatever reason). However, the presumption is that you would want your child to get some of your stuff, so they are entitled to their intestate share, barring the same three exceptions above.

Can anyone conform or deny this? Thanks!

redblueyellow
Posts: 465
Joined: Sun Jan 11, 2015 9:50 pm

Re: 2015 February California Bar Exam

Postby redblueyellow » Tue Feb 17, 2015 7:26 pm

For Question 5 - July, 2009 (Remedies, Civ Pro, Ethics), I have a question about this particular paragraph/question:

"Thereafter, Paul, one of the neighbors and a plaintiff in the state court case, separately
retained Lawyer and filed an application for a permanent injunction against Diane in
federal court asserting the same causes of action and requesting the same relief as in
the state court case. Personal jurisdiction, subject matter jurisdiction, and venue were
proper. The federal court granted Diane’s motion to dismiss Paul’s federal court
application on the basis of preclusion.


Question 2. Was the federal court’s denial of Paul’s application for a permanent injunction
correct? Discuss. Do not address substantive property or riparian rights."

Without the underlined sentence, would you still have analyzed this question under Res Judicata or would you have done a write up for permanent injunction (as in #1 which I did not post here)? In other words, I'm trying to see if that question 2 only hinged on res judicata solely because of the underlined sentence, or if it was also hinted at during the rest of the paragraph (I don't think it was).

User avatar
bb8900
Posts: 91
Joined: Mon May 17, 2010 11:33 pm

Re: 2015 February California Bar Exam

Postby bb8900 » Tue Feb 17, 2015 7:27 pm

ringdabell wrote:Does anyone know if we can bring our luggage to the exam center (Oakland Convention Center) and leave it there?



Yes you can. They will hold it until after the exam is over on Thursday.

redblueyellow
Posts: 465
Joined: Sun Jan 11, 2015 9:50 pm

Re: 2015 February California Bar Exam

Postby redblueyellow » Tue Feb 17, 2015 7:27 pm

bb8900 wrote:Wills and Trusts Question:

An omitted child is one who is born after the execution of the will and is left out. They can still get their cut, barring exceptions for (1) intentional omission of child, (2) $$ left with another parent, or (3) provided for outside of the will.

Is there such a thing as a pretermitted child? I swear I read that somewhere, but cannot find it now! It is basically a child who is born before the will was made, but still not in it (for whatever reason). However, the presumption is that you would want your child to get some of your stuff, so they are entitled to their intestate share, barring the same three exceptions above.

Can anyone conform or deny this? Thanks!


Someone asked a question about that here a few days/week ago. I think a pretermitted child (I had never heard this term before) and omitted child are the same thing.

User avatar
a male human
Posts: 1678
Joined: Tue Mar 31, 2009 2:42 pm

Re: 2015 February California Bar Exam

Postby a male human » Tue Feb 17, 2015 7:37 pm

redblueyellow wrote:For Question 5 - July, 2009 (Remedies, Civ Pro, Ethics), I have a question about this particular paragraph/question:

"Thereafter, Paul, one of the neighbors and a plaintiff in the state court case, separately
retained Lawyer and filed an application for a permanent injunction against Diane in
federal court asserting the same causes of action and requesting the same relief as in
the state court case. Personal jurisdiction, subject matter jurisdiction, and venue were
proper. The federal court granted Diane’s motion to dismiss Paul’s federal court
application on the basis of preclusion.


Question 2. Was the federal court’s denial of Paul’s application for a permanent injunction
correct? Discuss. Do not address substantive property or riparian rights."

Without the underlined sentence, would you still have analyzed this question under Res Judicata or would you have done a write up for permanent injunction (as in #1 which I did not post here)? In other words, I'm trying to see if that question 2 only hinged on res judicata solely because of the underlined sentence, or if it was also hinted at during the rest of the paragraph (I don't think it was).

Which part of the facts without the underlined part would trigger a rule element for res judicata?

ringdabell
Posts: 84
Joined: Tue Nov 23, 2010 6:43 pm

Re: 2015 February California Bar Exam

Postby ringdabell » Tue Feb 17, 2015 7:38 pm

bb8900 wrote:
ringdabell wrote:Does anyone know if we can bring our luggage to the exam center (Oakland Convention Center) and leave it there?



Yes you can. They will hold it until after the exam is over on Thursday.



Great. thanks. I just thought I read somewhere that you can't bring a luggage or something.

redblueyellow
Posts: 465
Joined: Sun Jan 11, 2015 9:50 pm

Re: 2015 February California Bar Exam

Postby redblueyellow » Tue Feb 17, 2015 8:35 pm

a male human wrote:
redblueyellow wrote:For Question 5 - July, 2009 (Remedies, Civ Pro, Ethics), I have a question about this particular paragraph/question:

"Thereafter, Paul, one of the neighbors and a plaintiff in the state court case, separately
retained Lawyer and filed an application for a permanent injunction against Diane in
federal court asserting the same causes of action and requesting the same relief as in
the state court case. Personal jurisdiction, subject matter jurisdiction, and venue were
proper. The federal court granted Diane’s motion to dismiss Paul’s federal court
application on the basis of preclusion.


Question 2. Was the federal court’s denial of Paul’s application for a permanent injunction
correct? Discuss. Do not address substantive property or riparian rights."

Without the underlined sentence, would you still have analyzed this question under Res Judicata or would you have done a write up for permanent injunction (as in #1 which I did not post here)? In other words, I'm trying to see if that question 2 only hinged on res judicata solely because of the underlined sentence, or if it was also hinted at during the rest of the paragraph (I don't think it was).

Which part of the facts without the underlined part would trigger a rule element for res judicata?


Probably the part about the same causes of action and same relief, I suppose.




Return to “Bar Exam Prep and Discussion Forum”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: eafrica17, pleasepass and 9 guests