Alrighty, I don't have time to really study the rest, unless it's key. Still need to do trusts, learn about PTs, Cal Civ Pro, Cal Evid, and probably go over everything again anyways.
Also, is "wills" ALWAYS going to be "per CA rules?"
Leansheets have rules for Fed and CA it seems.
Good question. I've looked at five wills essays. Four of them call for CA rules. The last one has two parts. The first part calls for CA rules, and the second part is about doctrine of cy pres but does not specify CA or federal. This small sample suggests that it'll almost always be CA rules.
Yea, those are good enough odds to just run/learn the CA rules.
One more thing, if you happen to know:
In some essays I've seen (cal bar models) and then high scoring essays on baressays, students write the validity of wills in two methods, and I don't know which one is correct or more importantly, when they apply. Kaplan is not doing a good job or telling me how to structure a Wills essay.
1. Sometimes I see something along the lines of: "A valid will includes testamentary intent, proper capacity, and performance of the execution conformed with proper will formalities." Once that's done, they will then go on to mention whether it's attested or holographic, and in some cases, omit the attested/holographic elements entirely.
2. However, another method I see is people jumping directly into whether the will is attested or holographic, and give the elements of those. They won't mention the "a valid will includes" portion at all. Once they run the elements of either an attested or holographic will, then they'll start looking at capacity and move on to other defenses if appropriate.
Which way am I supposed go about structuring the essay? Why in #1 are the elements for an attested/holographic will completely omitted?