July 2015 California Bar Exam Forum

[BuenAbogado]

You can bring your own 4"x4" clock or an analog watch (my preference). Some test centers should have a wall clock, however.

Hm I always thought there would be a wall clock. Guess I need to find a watch or clock to bring in. Sorry for all the questions, but do you know if there is a ban on digital clocks like there was for the LSAT?

Yeah, don't bring digital anything. I think there's a list of allowed and disallowed items on the bar website somewhere.

I was just coming back to edit and say I found the link to the rules. Thank you!

Also for anyone wondering: http://admissions.calbar.ca.gov/Portals ... CIES_R.pdf

Beware of dumb rules coming out on MBE day (it's cell block H day). We were told at our testing center we could NOT blow our noses with tissues at our exam table. We would have to go to the bathroom to do that. Stupid NCBE did not consider February=Cold and Flu season.

No problem. I'll blow my nose without a tissue at my desk so I don't fail.

[BuenAbogado]

For Ontario Convention Center, are hooded sweatshirts allowed? I dunno if that counts as a hoodie/hat that is banned.

It's a gated community, so they're only permissible if you're okay with getting shot.

But seriously...You should be prepared for an involuntary cavity search. They are dead serious about enforcing the #2 pencil rule and past takers have been known to get cheeky in bypassing this rule. They. Will. Find. Out.

Too soon bro, too soon. Gotta wait until September 2017.

I forgot about the 5 year 7 month SoL on jokes related to deaths...Fuck; I'm never going to pass the Bar

Dude, I doubt they'll test that much detail. You should be OK.

[Redamon1]

I took the bar exam twice. I passed the second time, but the first time I missed by less than 10 points. I spent the night before day 3 stressing about cal civ pro. Had I ignored it, I probably would have passed the first time.

I think if it gets tested it'll be a crossover. Freer was the barbri lecturer last year for civ pro and he sounded like he knew what the likely test hypo would look like in the event cal civ pro were tested- if I remember he said it'd likely be a PJ/motion to quash service/demurrer and some other stuff...

I'd spend a couple hours studying it- 2-3% of your overall study time IMO

Do any BarBri peeps have a recollection of what Freer said would likely be tested for Cal Civ Pro (in the unlikely scenario it shows up)?

He was betting on special appearance to make a motion to quash service of process, possibly followed by the special writ of mandate, which is the only way you can appeal the lower court's denial of this motion. YIKESSSSS!

[Neatrends]

Anyone know where to find the password for the mock exam?

[soj]

.

[robinhoodOO]

I took the bar exam twice. I passed the second time, but the first time I missed by less than 10 points. I spent the night before day 3 stressing about cal civ pro. Had I ignored it, I probably would have passed the first time.

I think if it gets tested it'll be a crossover. Freer was the barbri lecturer last year for civ pro and he sounded like he knew what the likely test hypo would look like in the event cal civ pro were tested- if I remember he said it'd likely be a PJ/motion to quash service/demurrer and some other stuff...

I'd spend a couple hours studying it- 2-3% of your overall study time IMO

Do any BarBri peeps have a recollection of what Freer said would likely be tested for Cal Civ Pro (in the unlikely scenario it shows up)?

He was betting on special appearance to make a motion to quash service of process, possibly followed by the special writ of mandate, which is the only way you can appeal the lower court's denial of this motion. YIKESSSSS!

You can't appeal it after entry of judgment like any other issue? I'm pretty sure you can...

[robinhoodOO]

Anyone know where to find the password for the mock exam?

Pretty sure it's your birthdate and also pretty sure this information is in the instructions somewhere

[Redamon1]

I took the bar exam twice. I passed the second time, but the first time I missed by less than 10 points. I spent the night before day 3 stressing about cal civ pro. Had I ignored it, I probably would have passed the first time.

I think if it gets tested it'll be a crossover. Freer was the barbri lecturer last year for civ pro and he sounded like he knew what the likely test hypo would look like in the event cal civ pro were tested- if I remember he said it'd likely be a PJ/motion to quash service/demurrer and some other stuff...

I'd spend a couple hours studying it- 2-3% of your overall study time IMO

Do any BarBri peeps have a recollection of what Freer said would likely be tested for Cal Civ Pro (in the unlikely scenario it shows up)?

He was betting on special appearance to make a motion to quash service of process, possibly followed by the special writ of mandate, which is the only way you can appeal the lower court's denial of this motion. YIKESSSSS!

You can't appeal it after entry of judgment like any other issue? I'm pretty sure you can...

Right, that would make sense. I think the rule here is that interlocutory review of a denial of a motion to squash can only be raised via the writ of mandate.

[BuenAbogado]

I took the bar exam twice. I passed the second time, but the first time I missed by less than 10 points. I spent the night before day 3 stressing about cal civ pro. Had I ignored it, I probably would have passed the first time.

I think if it gets tested it'll be a crossover. Freer was the barbri lecturer last year for civ pro and he sounded like he knew what the likely test hypo would look like in the event cal civ pro were tested- if I remember he said it'd likely be a PJ/motion to quash service/demurrer and some other stuff...

I'd spend a couple hours studying it- 2-3% of your overall study time IMO

Do any BarBri peeps have a recollection of what Freer said would likely be tested for Cal Civ Pro (in the unlikely scenario it shows up)?

He was betting on special appearance to make a motion to quash service of process, possibly followed by the special writ of mandate, which is the only way you can appeal the lower court's denial of this motion. YIKESSSSS!

You can't appeal it after entry of judgment like any other issue? I'm pretty sure you can...

Right, that would make sense. I think the rule here is that interlocutory review of a denial of a motion to squash can only be raised via the writ of mandate.

Nah, if they test ca civ they will make it easy in order to announce that it's now being tested. They'll probably do a primary rights issue. Car accident with preclusion claim.

[robinhoodOO]

I took the bar exam twice. I passed the second time, but the first time I missed by less than 10 points. I spent the night before day 3 stressing about cal civ pro. Had I ignored it, I probably would have passed the first time.

I think if it gets tested it'll be a crossover. Freer was the barbri lecturer last year for civ pro and he sounded like he knew what the likely test hypo would look like in the event cal civ pro were tested- if I remember he said it'd likely be a PJ/motion to quash service/demurrer and some other stuff...

I'd spend a couple hours studying it- 2-3% of your overall study time IMO

Do any BarBri peeps have a recollection of what Freer said would likely be tested for Cal Civ Pro (in the unlikely scenario it shows up)?

He was betting on special appearance to make a motion to quash service of process, possibly followed by the special writ of mandate, which is the only way you can appeal the lower court's denial of this motion. YIKESSSSS!

You can't appeal it after entry of judgment like any other issue? I'm pretty sure you can...

Right, that would make sense. I think the rule here is that interlocutory review of a denial of a motion to squash can only be raised via the writ of mandate.

Yup; that's what I thought. Just confirming...

[a male human]

I usually wipe my snot on my hand or sleeve anyway because I'm too beta to make noise with my sneezing or noseblow in public

[a male human]

Speaking of which, how is everyone planning on keeping track of time during the test? Should I just buy a cheap Casio watch and use that, or is there a cheap alternative that is actually a stopwatch of some sort?

Can you borrow an analog watch and set it to 12 every section?

[Redamon1]

I took the bar exam twice. I passed the second time, but the first time I missed by less than 10 points. I spent the night before day 3 stressing about cal civ pro. Had I ignored it, I probably would have passed the first time.

I think if it gets tested it'll be a crossover. Freer was the barbri lecturer last year for civ pro and he sounded like he knew what the likely test hypo would look like in the event cal civ pro were tested- if I remember he said it'd likely be a PJ/motion to quash service/demurrer and some other stuff...

I'd spend a couple hours studying it- 2-3% of your overall study time IMO

Do any BarBri peeps have a recollection of what Freer said would likely be tested for Cal Civ Pro (in the unlikely scenario it shows up)?

He was betting on special appearance to make a motion to quash service of process, possibly followed by the special writ of mandate, which is the only way you can appeal the lower court's denial of this motion. YIKESSSSS!

You can't appeal it after entry of judgment like any other issue? I'm pretty sure you can...

Right, that would make sense. I think the rule here is that interlocutory review of a denial of a motion to squash can only be raised via the writ of mandate.

Nah, if they test ca civ they will make it easy in order to announce that it's now being tested. They'll probably do a primary rights issue. Car accident with preclusion claim.

Yeah that's a very good guess. It hit me today while practicing Barbri CivPro Essay 3 (Feb 2006) that the primary right issue could come up even in a fact patter where a case is being litigated in federal court, since it is the preclusion law of the court that heard Case 1 that determines what claim or issue is precluded in Case 2. So here's the fact pattern: Case 1 in CA state court involves K claims and Case 2 is in federal court on the same T/O but involves both K and tort claims. Or, sneakier yet, they don't tell you in what state court the first case was.

[robinhoodOO]

I took the bar exam twice. I passed the second time, but the first time I missed by less than 10 points. I spent the night before day 3 stressing about cal civ pro. Had I ignored it, I probably would have passed the first time.

I think if it gets tested it'll be a crossover. Freer was the barbri lecturer last year for civ pro and he sounded like he knew what the likely test hypo would look like in the event cal civ pro were tested- if I remember he said it'd likely be a PJ/motion to quash service/demurrer and some other stuff...

I'd spend a couple hours studying it- 2-3% of your overall study time IMO

Do any BarBri peeps have a recollection of what Freer said would likely be tested for Cal Civ Pro (in the unlikely scenario it shows up)?

He was betting on special appearance to make a motion to quash service of process, possibly followed by the special writ of mandate, which is the only way you can appeal the lower court's denial of this motion. YIKESSSSS!

You can't appeal it after entry of judgment like any other issue? I'm pretty sure you can...

Right, that would make sense. I think the rule here is that interlocutory review of a denial of a motion to squash can only be raised via the writ of mandate.

Nah, if they test ca civ they will make it easy in order to announce that it's now being tested. They'll probably do a primary rights issue. Car accident with preclusion claim.

Yeah that's a very good guess. It hit me today while practicing Barbri CivPro Essay 3 (Feb 2006) that the primary right issue could come up even in a fact patter where a case is being litigated in federal court, since it is the preclusion law of the court that heard Case 1 that determines what claim or issue is precluded in Case 2. So here's the fact pattern: Case 1 in CA state court involves K claims and Case 2 is in federal court on the same T/O but involves both K and tort claims. Or, sneakier yet, they don't tell you in what state court the first case was.

Funny, I spoke to some last week that said they were certain Res Judicata and Collateral Estoppel were due and thought they'd be on this exam. I suppose I could see them testing CA Civ Pro that way...

[BuenAbogado]

I took the bar exam twice. I passed the second time, but the first time I missed by less than 10 points. I spent the night before day 3 stressing about cal civ pro. Had I ignored it, I probably would have passed the first time.

I think if it gets tested it'll be a crossover. Freer was the barbri lecturer last year for civ pro and he sounded like he knew what the likely test hypo would look like in the event cal civ pro were tested- if I remember he said it'd likely be a PJ/motion to quash service/demurrer and some other stuff...

I'd spend a couple hours studying it- 2-3% of your overall study time IMO

Do any BarBri peeps have a recollection of what Freer said would likely be tested for Cal Civ Pro (in the unlikely scenario it shows up)?

He was betting on special appearance to make a motion to quash service of process, possibly followed by the special writ of mandate, which is the only way you can appeal the lower court's denial of this motion. YIKESSSSS!

You can't appeal it after entry of judgment like any other issue? I'm pretty sure you can...

Right, that would make sense. I think the rule here is that interlocutory review of a denial of a motion to squash can only be raised via the writ of mandate.

Nah, if they test ca civ they will make it easy in order to announce that it's now being tested. They'll probably do a primary rights issue. Car accident with preclusion claim.

Yeah that's a very good guess. It hit me today while practicing Barbri CivPro Essay 3 (Feb 2006) that the primary right issue could come up even in a fact patter where a case is being litigated in federal court, since it is the preclusion law of the court that heard Case 1 that determines what claim or issue is precluded in Case 2. So here's the fact pattern: Case 1 in CA state court involves K claims and Case 2 is in federal court on the same T/O but involves both K and tort claims. Or, sneakier yet, they don't tell you in what state court the first case was.

Yeah that would be a pretty good CA Civ Pro question. But somehow I don't see them breaking out CA Civ Pro on July. I feel like they like to make the feb questions harder since a lot of people have studied twice and thus know the law better and they need a way to differentiate candidates more easily.

My predictions are:

C - C
E - C
R - L E
P - C S
C - P V
C - M A S

[LawIsPrettyCool]

Yo I heard we are having a full blown quasi in rem analysis essay question.

[redblueyellow]

My predictions are:

C - C
E - C
R - L E
P - C S
C - P V
C - M A S

Wut?

Also, primary rights = fact pleading, right?

[LawIsPrettyCool]

My predictions are:

C - C
E - C
R - L E
P - C S
C - P V
C - M A S

Wut?

Also, primary rights = fact pleading, right?

Don't mean the same thin but if u have prim rights you'll have fact pleading so you're kind of right

[gaagoots]

I took the bar exam twice. I passed the second time, but the first time I missed by less than 10 points. I spent the night before day 3 stressing about cal civ pro. Had I ignored it, I probably would have passed the first time.

I think if it gets tested it'll be a crossover. Freer was the barbri lecturer last year for civ pro and he sounded like he knew what the likely test hypo would look like in the event cal civ pro were tested- if I remember he said it'd likely be a PJ/motion to quash service/demurrer and some other stuff...

I'd spend a couple hours studying it- 2-3% of your overall study time IMO

Do any BarBri peeps have a recollection of what Freer said would likely be tested for Cal Civ Pro (in the unlikely scenario it shows up)?

He was betting on special appearance to make a motion to quash service of process, possibly followed by the special writ of mandate, which is the only way you can appeal the lower court's denial of this motion. YIKESSSSS!

I was listening to that lecture at work and I'm the only one who said PLEASE let them test that fact pattern. I was assigned to work on the UD from hell, and the home owner of a fraudulent foreclosure was 'so called personally served' in CA while he was out of state, we quashed, judge denied, said have 5 days to answer, filed a writ, tenants on the premise served a nail and mail posting, this one was real, no notice to tenants regarding the foreclosure, the foreclosure trustee was indicted on 3 counts of fraud,there is a case for quiet title on the property by real owner against new owner because of the fraud, we are consolidating, it gets worse BUT they wouldn't test on UD timeline in civ pro, way too many differences especially in timing and exceptions for limited cases for special demurrers for UDs. For me during bar study this was the best PT practice ever

[paulshortys10]

what's primary rights??

I haven't studied CA Civ Pro besides watching a lecture....hope it doesn't come up.

[Tiago Splitter]

what's primary rights??

I haven't studied CA Civ Pro besides watching a lecture....hope it doesn't come up.

Under the Federal Rules you get claim preclusion for all claims arising out of the same transaction or occurrence. CA recognizes the primary rights doctrine which says you can sue again if different primary rights are implicated. The main distinction is property vs. personal injury. So if you are injured in a car crash and you sue first for the damage to your car you can sue again for the injuries and not be precluded. Whereas under the Federal Rules you would be.

Even if they don't specifically test CA Civ Pro you can probably get a couple free points if they ask a Fed Civ Pro question about preclusion on an essay and you toss that in there.

I'm with you on everything else. I feel like if a CA Civ Pro question shows up half of the room is just gonna get up and walk out.

[robinhoodOO]

Yo I heard we are having a full blown quasi in rem analysis essay question.

$1,000 says this is as likely as them testing the Model Code. Yes, someone actually asked what they needed to know about the Model Code and how to differentiate...People are getting paranoid.

[gaagoots]

Yo I heard we are having a full blown quasi in rem analysis essay question.

$1,000 says this is as likely as them testing the Model Code. Yes, someone actually asked what they needed to know about the Model Code and how to differentiate...People are getting paranoid.

I'd take one oddball (e.g.unconstitutional exactions or Anti-SLAAP) essay in exchange for an easy peasy PT.

[crumpetsandtea]

what's primary rights??

I haven't studied CA Civ Pro besides watching a lecture....hope it doesn't come up.

Under the Federal Rules you get claim preclusion for all claims arising out of the same transaction or occurrence. CA recognizes the primary rights doctrine which says you can sue again if different primary rights are implicated. The main distinction is property vs. personal injury. So if you are injured in a car crash and you sue first for the damage to your car you can sue again for the injuries and not be precluded. Whereas under the Federal Rules you would be.

Even if they don't specifically test CA Civ Pro you can probably get a couple free points if they ask a Fed Civ Pro question about preclusion on an essay and you toss that in there.

I'm with you on everything else. I feel like if a CA Civ Pro question shows up half of the room is just gonna get up and walk out.

Tiago!! You ending up back in CA?

[Tiago Splitter]

Yep Bay Area for me