robinhoodOO wrote: injun wrote:
mike.alexander23 wrote:What the best/most assuring one time calculator score combo you guys came up with?
I Just pulled this one out that made me smile
Essay 1 (civ pro): 65
Essay 2 (Real Prop): 65
Essay 3 (crim pro): 60
Essay 4 (Comm prop.): 65
Essay 5 (bullshit cross of Corp./Ethics): 55
Essay 6: (bullshit takings?/conlaw?): 60
PT A: 60
PT B: 65
Raw MBE: 126
FINAL SCORE-->1440 = PASS
This is a very conservative estimate of scores. I feel really good about real property and CP, so not getting a 70+ on at least one would be a surprise.
Was thinking about that CP essay the other day....anyone mention Hugg and Nelson? I put them down, but as I was analyzing it, the math didn't make sense. I think I ended up concluding that it was CP with each getting 1/2
Wouldn't it just be 25% SP and 75% CP split, based on the fact that they were, in part, for past performance? So, using those percentages, H gets $30K and W gets $50K (her 25% SP ($20K) for the last year, plus her 1/2 CP--which is half of $60K, which is $30K).
I'm pretty sure that's what I did, but I could be wrong on all counts.
I'm no expert but I used the Nelson formula.
The Nelson formula is used where the options were primarily intended as compensation for future performance and as an incentive to stay with the company. The formula used in Nelson is:
DOG – DOS
----------------- x Number of shares exercisable = Community Property Shares
DOG - DOE
(DOG = Date of Grant; DOS = Date of Separation; DOE = Date of Exercisability).
Using the above formula:
2012 - 2013
-------------- x $80, 000.00
---- x $80, 000.00 = $40, 000.00 (community property).
Therefore, wife keeps 40k as separate property and takes 20k as her share of CP. Wife's total is $60k. Husband takes 20k as his share of CP.
I didn't use the Hugg formula 'cos Hugg is used in cases where the options were primarily intended to attract the employee to the job and reward past services. The Hypo of course wasn't very clear on this issue because first it said: "In 2010, Wendy accepted a job at Company. At that time, she was told that if she performed well, she would receive stock options in the near future
." Then it later said "In 2012, Wendy was granted stock options by Company, which would become exercisable in 2014, in part because she had been a very effective employee
." It is therefore an arguable question as to which formula applies.
But maybe we were expected to do a detailed analysis here, i.e. Husband would want Hugg to be used cos he gets $30k and wife gets 50k. Wife would want Nelson 'cos she gets 60k while husband gets only 20k. Who had time for that with the Q5 and Q6 staring one in the face?