July 2015 California Bar Exam

User avatar
Tiago Splitter
Posts: 15487
Joined: Tue Jun 28, 2011 1:20 am

Re: July 2015 California Bar Exam

Postby Tiago Splitter » Tue Nov 10, 2015 11:53 pm

Zaizei wrote:
tmanix wrote:Is it weird that the state bar website lets me register for the Feb 2016 bar exam?


Same here... :shock: Can someone else check pls? Maybe the system lets everyone register and we are freaking out.

Same exact discussion took place in last year's thread. There is nothing to see here.

mike.alexander23
Posts: 270
Joined: Mon Apr 22, 2013 11:24 pm

Re: July 2015 California Bar Exam

Postby mike.alexander23 » Thu Nov 12, 2015 4:17 pm

Is anybody having trouble logging in to their admission status page (https://sbc.calbar.ca.gov/default.aspx)? I went to double check to make sure my moral character app was approved and it just get a blank white screen. I'm not saying this means anything, but just wanted to see if anyone else is experiencing a similar issue. :shock:

needaday
Posts: 33
Joined: Wed Jul 08, 2015 12:15 pm

Re: July 2015 California Bar Exam

Postby needaday » Thu Nov 12, 2015 4:24 pm

mike.alexander23 wrote:Is anybody having trouble logging in to their admission status page (https://sbc.calbar.ca.gov/default.aspx)? I went to double check to make sure my moral character app was approved and it just get a blank white screen. I'm not saying this means anything, but just wanted to see if anyone else is experiencing a similar issue. :shock:


Got in just fine a few mins ago. CA bar requirement still not satisfied :(

Zaizei
Posts: 119
Joined: Sun May 24, 2015 7:05 pm

Re: July 2015 California Bar Exam

Postby Zaizei » Thu Nov 12, 2015 4:51 pm

mike.alexander23 wrote:Is anybody having trouble logging in to their admission status page (https://sbc.calbar.ca.gov/default.aspx)? I went to double check to make sure my moral character app was approved and it just get a blank white screen. I'm not saying this means anything, but just wanted to see if anyone else is experiencing a similar issue. :shock:


I tried too and could see the screen without any problem. Maybe they are updating some info.

User avatar
a male human
Posts: 1685
Joined: Tue Mar 31, 2009 2:42 pm

Re: July 2015 California Bar Exam

Postby a male human » Thu Nov 12, 2015 4:53 pm

Who's making the next topic

Zaizei
Posts: 119
Joined: Sun May 24, 2015 7:05 pm

Re: July 2015 California Bar Exam

Postby Zaizei » Thu Nov 12, 2015 5:04 pm

a male human wrote:Who's making the next topic


I guess this is normal since the big day is near :roll:

User avatar
tmanix
Posts: 31
Joined: Wed Sep 09, 2015 7:42 pm

Re: July 2015 California Bar Exam

Postby tmanix » Thu Nov 12, 2015 5:46 pm

So I have been lamenting to everyone about how I didn't finish PT A because I didn't conclude before the Pasadena proctor called time. Well this week I re-read the memo and turns out it says: "Do not include an introduction, a section on the factual background and procedural history, or a conclusion." Oh boy, what a sweet relief!

User avatar
robinhoodOO
Posts: 874
Joined: Wed Mar 16, 2011 1:08 pm

Re: July 2015 California Bar Exam

Postby robinhoodOO » Thu Nov 12, 2015 5:59 pm

tmanix wrote:So I have been lamenting to everyone about how I didn't finish PT A because I didn't conclude before the Pasadena proctor called time. Well this week I re-read the memo and turns out it says: "Do not include an introduction, a section on the factual background and procedural history, or a conclusion." Oh boy, what a sweet relief!


Is it wrong that when I was taking PT:A I was thinking: "Geez, I hope thousands of takers include all of this so that my answer looks like I actually followed the instructions."

User avatar
BuenAbogado
Posts: 238
Joined: Sun Jul 05, 2015 3:43 pm

Re: July 2015 California Bar Exam

Postby BuenAbogado » Thu Nov 12, 2015 6:57 pm

robinhoodOO wrote:
tmanix wrote:So I have been lamenting to everyone about how I didn't finish PT A because I didn't conclude before the Pasadena proctor called time. Well this week I re-read the memo and turns out it says: "Do not include an introduction, a section on the factual background and procedural history, or a conclusion." Oh boy, what a sweet relief!


Is it wrong that when I was taking PT:A I was thinking: "Geez, I hope thousands of takers include all of this so that my answer looks like I actually followed the instructions."


What happens then is that the grader forgets that it said no conclusion.

User avatar
tmanix
Posts: 31
Joined: Wed Sep 09, 2015 7:42 pm

Re: July 2015 California Bar Exam

Postby tmanix » Thu Nov 12, 2015 7:15 pm

BuenAbogado wrote:
robinhoodOO wrote:
tmanix wrote:So I have been lamenting to everyone about how I didn't finish PT A because I didn't conclude before the Pasadena proctor called time. Well this week I re-read the memo and turns out it says: "Do not include an introduction, a section on the factual background and procedural history, or a conclusion." Oh boy, what a sweet relief!


Is it wrong that when I was taking PT:A I was thinking: "Geez, I hope thousands of takers include all of this so that my answer looks like I actually followed the instructions."


What happens then is that the grader forgets that it said no conclusion.

Fuccckkkk. I hope not

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

Re: July 2015 California Bar Exam

Postby gaagoots » Thu Nov 12, 2015 7:26 pm

tmanix wrote:
BuenAbogado wrote:
robinhoodOO wrote:
tmanix wrote:So I have been lamenting to everyone about how I didn't finish PT A because I didn't conclude before the Pasadena proctor called time. Well this week I re-read the memo and turns out it says: "Do not include an introduction, a section on the factual background and procedural history, or a conclusion." Oh boy, what a sweet relief!


Is it wrong that when I was taking PT:A I was thinking: "Geez, I hope thousands of takers include all of this so that my answer looks like I actually followed the instructions."


What happens then is that the grader forgets that it said no conclusion.

Fuccckkkk. I hope not



No, this is their little bitch way to say *gotcha* because I have heard many times, "First thing you do is write your conclusion so it looks like you finished" so for years people have followed that advice. This is a demented way of seeing we did finish without the BS conclusion.

ilovetheatre
Posts: 50
Joined: Mon Jun 01, 2015 11:16 pm

Re: July 2015 California Bar Exam

Postby ilovetheatre » Fri Nov 13, 2015 2:22 am

7 days 19 hours 37 min 55 seconds

User avatar
BuenAbogado
Posts: 238
Joined: Sun Jul 05, 2015 3:43 pm

Re: July 2015 California Bar Exam

Postby BuenAbogado » Fri Nov 13, 2015 2:50 am

ilovetheatre wrote:7 days 19 hours 37 min 55 seconds


That's not true, anymore.

User avatar
MarcZero
Posts: 156
Joined: Sun Apr 24, 2011 11:26 pm

Re: July 2015 California Bar Exam

Postby MarcZero » Fri Nov 13, 2015 10:06 pm


User avatar
BuenAbogado
Posts: 238
Joined: Sun Jul 05, 2015 3:43 pm

Re: July 2015 California Bar Exam

Postby BuenAbogado » Fri Nov 13, 2015 11:59 pm

MarcZero wrote:It's coming...

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sHrod2skYPo


"Hi! This is Randy calling from the California Bar! Just wanted to be the first to tell you that you failed!"

JosephusMyer
Posts: 61
Joined: Sat Jan 14, 2012 7:06 am

Re: July 2015 California Bar Exam

Postby JosephusMyer » Sat Nov 14, 2015 6:02 am

This is getting bad. I get unnaturally stressed every time I go to the DTLA Denny's (opposite State Bar building). Thank goodness there's a Ralph's downtown now, because I don't know what I'd do if I had to go to Smart & Final (ground floor of State Bar building).

mike.alexander23
Posts: 270
Joined: Mon Apr 22, 2013 11:24 pm

Re: July 2015 California Bar Exam

Postby mike.alexander23 » Sat Nov 14, 2015 7:40 pm

Unreal how we have to be constantly reminded of the possibility of failing.

http://www.latimes.com/local/education/ ... story.html

mike.alexander23
Posts: 270
Joined: Mon Apr 22, 2013 11:24 pm

Re: July 2015 California Bar Exam

Postby mike.alexander23 » Sat Nov 14, 2015 10:15 pm

Anybody have a topic of discussion we can start?

User avatar
a male human
Posts: 1685
Joined: Tue Mar 31, 2009 2:42 pm

Re: July 2015 California Bar Exam

Postby a male human » Sat Nov 14, 2015 10:17 pm

mike.alexander23 wrote:Anybody have a topic of discussion we can start?

Do you think I'm pretty?

mike.alexander23
Posts: 270
Joined: Mon Apr 22, 2013 11:24 pm

Re: July 2015 California Bar Exam

Postby mike.alexander23 » Sat Nov 14, 2015 10:23 pm

a male human wrote:
mike.alexander23 wrote:Anybody have a topic of discussion we can start?

Do you think I'm pretty?

I've lost all sense of beauty through this process. Life is dull to me

User avatar
tmanix
Posts: 31
Joined: Wed Sep 09, 2015 7:42 pm

Re: July 2015 California Bar Exam

Postby tmanix » Sat Nov 14, 2015 10:45 pm

mike.alexander23 wrote:Anybody have a topic of discussion we can start?

Is anyone planning to postpone checking their results until Sunday?

User avatar
robinhoodOO
Posts: 874
Joined: Wed Mar 16, 2011 1:08 pm

Re: July 2015 California Bar Exam

Postby robinhoodOO » Sat Nov 14, 2015 11:37 pm

tmanix wrote:
mike.alexander23 wrote:Anybody have a topic of discussion we can start?

Is anyone planning to postpone checking their results until Sunday?


And lose out on a perfectly good weekend to celebrate or drink your denial away? Hell no
Last edited by robinhoodOO on Sat Nov 14, 2015 11:39 pm, edited 1 time in total.

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

Re: July 2015 California Bar Exam

Postby gaagoots » Sat Nov 14, 2015 11:39 pm

mike.alexander23 wrote:Unreal how we have to be constantly reminded of the possibility of failing.

http://www.latimes.com/local/education/ ... story.html


Today I read this entire thread, viewtopic.php?f=41&t=251990. Those freaked out the most were not confident or banking on passing the MBE because of their high LSAT scores. Why else was this thread 35 pages long? Most of those participating had decent LSAT scores and were still befuddled by the MBE. The NCBE knows the majority of applicants narrowed their answers between two for a 50/50 chance. You have to laugh, it's not minimum competency to *guess* as a lawyer, let alone have 1.08 seconds to determine if your Gila monster client has constitutional rights that have been violated. The only thing in RL I've seen close to that was when PITA claimed Shamu was subject to involuntary servitude under the Thirteenth Amendment.

User avatar
robinhoodOO
Posts: 874
Joined: Wed Mar 16, 2011 1:08 pm

Re: July 2015 California Bar Exam

Postby robinhoodOO » Sat Nov 14, 2015 11:59 pm

gaagoots wrote:
mike.alexander23 wrote:Unreal how we have to be constantly reminded of the possibility of failing.

http://www.latimes.com/local/education/ ... story.html


Today I read this entire thread, viewtopic.php?f=41&t=251990. Those freaked out the most were not confident or banking on passing the MBE because of their high LSAT scores. Why else was this thread 35 pages long? Most of those participating had decent LSAT scores and were still befuddled by the MBE. The NCBE knows the majority of applicants narrowed their answers between two for a 50/50 chance. You have to laugh, it's not minimum competency to *guess* as a lawyer, let alone have 1.08 seconds to determine if your Gila monster client has constitutional rights that have been violated. The only thing in RL I've seen close to that was when PITA claimed Shamu was subject to involuntary servitude under the Thirteenth Amendment.


First comment I saw in response was a guy blaming affirmative action. Well, at least this has spurred some serious debate of the important issues :roll:

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

Re: July 2015 California Bar Exam

Postby gaagoots » Sun Nov 15, 2015 12:09 am

robinhoodOO wrote:
gaagoots wrote:
mike.alexander23 wrote:Unreal how we have to be constantly reminded of the possibility of failing.

http://www.latimes.com/local/education/ ... story.html


Today I read this entire thread, viewtopic.php?f=41&t=251990. Those freaked out the most were not confident or banking on passing the MBE because of their high LSAT scores. Why else was this thread 35 pages long? Most of those participating had decent LSAT scores and were still befuddled by the MBE. The NCBE knows the majority of applicants narrowed their answers between two for a 50/50 chance. You have to laugh, it's not minimum competency to *guess* as a lawyer, let alone have 1.08 seconds to determine if your Gila monster client has constitutional rights that have been violated. The only thing in RL I've seen close to that was when PITA claimed Shamu was subject to involuntary servitude under the Thirteenth Amendment.


First comment I saw in response was a guy blaming affirmative action. Well, at least this has spurred some serious debate of the important issues :roll:


Reading it today killed a lot of time. Many of us from CA didn't participate since we still had day three to deal with. I think it's amazing what you did with your spreadsheet especially when you see those arguing that Wednesday and what their scores were in the end.




Return to “Bar Exam Prep and Discussion Forum”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests