Themis Bar Review Hangout - July 2015 Exam

User avatar
somuchbooty
Posts: 4192
Joined: Sun Mar 29, 2015 12:15 am

Re: Themis Bar Review Hangout - July 2015 Exam

Postby somuchbooty » Wed Jul 01, 2015 5:21 pm

annapach wrote:Just putting it out there that I got 8/10 on the NCBE practice civ pro questions without even peeking at my notes. For the Themis civ pro questions sometimes i have to go beyond my notes, beyond the long outlines, deep into google, and I STILL get them wrong. I have a feeling they are complete BS and it kind of bothers me that they made them so obscure. What good does that really do us?


fear is a good motivator

User avatar
soj
Posts: 7735
Joined: Sat Jan 16, 2010 11:10 pm

Re: Themis Bar Review Hangout - July 2015 Exam

Postby soj » Wed Jul 01, 2015 5:26 pm

law students aren't going to avoid a prep course because course reviews say it was overinclusive. but they might if the reviews say it didn't cover enough material. now i realize extreme overinclusiveness is just as bad, but i didn't know when selecting a course

User avatar
annapach
Posts: 53
Joined: Fri Jun 19, 2015 4:24 pm

Re: Themis Bar Review Hangout - July 2015 Exam

Postby annapach » Wed Jul 01, 2015 5:26 pm

somuchbooty wrote:
annapach wrote:Just putting it out there that I got 8/10 on the NCBE practice civ pro questions without even peeking at my notes. For the Themis civ pro questions sometimes i have to go beyond my notes, beyond the long outlines, deep into google, and I STILL get them wrong. I have a feeling they are complete BS and it kind of bothers me that they made them so obscure. What good does that really do us?


fear is a good motivator



wasting time googling nonsense that you don't have to know is not a good motivator and accomplishes nothing. i agree that fear is a good motivator, but if so, make the questions relevant and just have us do 10,000 of them or something.

Pickled
Posts: 36
Joined: Mon May 25, 2015 2:03 pm

Re: Themis Bar Review Hangout - July 2015 Exam

Postby Pickled » Wed Jul 01, 2015 5:30 pm

Secured Transactions is the worst thing I have ever been exposed to in my life. Including mono.

User avatar
soj
Posts: 7735
Joined: Sat Jan 16, 2010 11:10 pm

Re: Themis Bar Review Hangout - July 2015 Exam

Postby soj » Wed Jul 01, 2015 5:32 pm

Pickled wrote:Secured Transactions is the worst thing I have ever been exposed to in my life. Including mono.

i took that shit in law school and it took me 2-3 whole days struggling with a supplement to finally be ready for it, and it was an open book test. so glad my state doesn't test that (i think). it's basically mortgages and recording statutes except worse

amorsebu14
Posts: 17
Joined: Tue Jun 23, 2015 10:07 pm

Re: Themis Bar Review Hangout - July 2015 Exam

Postby amorsebu14 » Wed Jul 01, 2015 5:38 pm

Pickled wrote:Secured Transactions is the worst thing I have ever been exposed to in my life. Including mono.


I actually love Secured Transactions. But then again, I'm weird like that. Secured Transactions is my happy place.

User avatar
paulshortys10
Posts: 619
Joined: Tue May 18, 2010 7:03 pm

Re: Themis Bar Review Hangout - July 2015 Exam

Postby paulshortys10 » Wed Jul 01, 2015 5:40 pm

annapach wrote:Just putting it out there that I got 8/10 on the NCBE practice civ pro questions without even peeking at my notes. For the Themis civ pro questions sometimes i have to go beyond my notes, beyond the long outlines, deep into google, and I STILL get them wrong. I have a feeling they are complete BS and it kind of bothers me that they made them so obscure. What good does that really do us?


Are these practice questions free?

User avatar
anon sequitur
Posts: 505
Joined: Sun Jun 10, 2012 2:14 am

Re: Themis Bar Review Hangout - July 2015 Exam

Postby anon sequitur » Wed Jul 01, 2015 5:41 pm

I feel like the Civ Pro problems are just due to having so little guidance from NCBE, literally just 10 sample questions is ridiculous. I haven't heard anyone using other bar prep companies with anything good to say about the civpro practice MBE's. I guess next year they'll have two tests worth of published questions and by then they'll have pretty good idea of what to model their own questions on. I'm pretty critical of Themis, but on this I don't know what they could reasonably do.

EDIT: there are 10 free practice questions for civ pro on the NCBE website.

User avatar
annapach
Posts: 53
Joined: Fri Jun 19, 2015 4:24 pm

Re: Themis Bar Review Hangout - July 2015 Exam

Postby annapach » Wed Jul 01, 2015 5:44 pm

anon sequitur wrote:I feel like the Civ Pro problems are just due to having so little guidance from NCBE, literally just 10 sample questions is ridiculous. I haven't heard anyone using other bar prep companies with anything good to say about the civpro practice MBE's. I guess next year they'll have two tests worth of published questions and by then they'll have pretty good idea of what to model their own questions on. I'm pretty critical of Themis, but on this I don't know what they could reasonably do.

EDIT: there are 10 free practice questions for civ pro on the NCBE website.



I mean I dunno. I guess they could have reasonably done a better job assessing the altitude from which these questions are asked. The NCBE questions are clearly concerned with basic definitions, routine application of FQ and diversity and filing guidelines. It seems mid-high altitude.

User avatar
Pleasye
Posts: 7963
Joined: Sun Mar 14, 2010 4:22 pm

Re: Themis Bar Review Hangout - July 2015 Exam

Postby Pleasye » Wed Jul 01, 2015 6:42 pm

annapach wrote:
anon sequitur wrote:I feel like the Civ Pro problems are just due to having so little guidance from NCBE, literally just 10 sample questions is ridiculous. I haven't heard anyone using other bar prep companies with anything good to say about the civpro practice MBE's. I guess next year they'll have two tests worth of published questions and by then they'll have pretty good idea of what to model their own questions on. I'm pretty critical of Themis, but on this I don't know what they could reasonably do.

EDIT: there are 10 free practice questions for civ pro on the NCBE website.



I mean I dunno. I guess they could have reasonably done a better job assessing the altitude from which these questions are asked. The NCBE questions are clearly concerned with basic definitions, routine application of FQ and diversity and filing guidelines. It seems mid-high altitude.

Yeah but if they made them simple like the released questions and then on the actual exam they weren't like that you would be screaming bloody murder so there's really no winning for them. Personally I'd rather have hard questions to practice with and then have them be easier on the exam.

User avatar
Raiden
Posts: 333
Joined: Wed Jul 25, 2012 8:11 pm

Re: Themis Bar Review Hangout - July 2015 Exam

Postby Raiden » Wed Jul 01, 2015 7:11 pm

Pleasye wrote:
annapach wrote:
anon sequitur wrote:I feel like the Civ Pro problems are just due to having so little guidance from NCBE, literally just 10 sample questions is ridiculous. I haven't heard anyone using other bar prep companies with anything good to say about the civpro practice MBE's. I guess next year they'll have two tests worth of published questions and by then they'll have pretty good idea of what to model their own questions on. I'm pretty critical of Themis, but on this I don't know what they could reasonably do.

EDIT: there are 10 free practice questions for civ pro on the NCBE website.



I mean I dunno. I guess they could have reasonably done a better job assessing the altitude from which these questions are asked. The NCBE questions are clearly concerned with basic definitions, routine application of FQ and diversity and filing guidelines. It seems mid-high altitude.

Yeah but if they made them simple like the released questions and then on the actual exam they weren't like that you would be screaming bloody murder so there's really no winning for them. Personally I'd rather have hard questions to practice with and then have them be easier on the exam.


So if it doesn't say that the question has been modified at the bottom of the answer choices, do we assume these are actual bar exam questions?

User avatar
Pleasye
Posts: 7963
Joined: Sun Mar 14, 2010 4:22 pm

Re: Themis Bar Review Hangout - July 2015 Exam

Postby Pleasye » Wed Jul 01, 2015 7:13 pm

Raiden wrote:So if it doesn't say that the question has been modified at the bottom of the answer choices, do we assume these are actual bar exam questions?

For all of the other subjects yes, but not for civ pro. I don't think they bother marking those since they just made pretty much all of them up. That's what I think at least.

Pickled
Posts: 36
Joined: Mon May 25, 2015 2:03 pm

Re: Themis Bar Review Hangout - July 2015 Exam

Postby Pickled » Wed Jul 01, 2015 8:22 pm

amorsebu14 wrote:
Pickled wrote:Secured Transactions is the worst thing I have ever been exposed to in my life. Including mono.


I actually love Secured Transactions. But then again, I'm weird like that. Secured Transactions is my happy place.




Ok...I am looking at you for a really great little synopsis of this shit. Pleeeeeeeeeease?

Confused7
Posts: 660
Joined: Mon Oct 11, 2010 2:01 pm

Re: Themis Bar Review Hangout - July 2015 Exam

Postby Confused7 » Wed Jul 01, 2015 9:01 pm

Pickled wrote:
amorsebu14 wrote:
Pickled wrote:Secured Transactions is the worst thing I have ever been exposed to in my life. Including mono.


I actually love Secured Transactions. But then again, I'm weird like that. Secured Transactions is my happy place.




Ok...I am looking at you for a really great little synopsis of this shit. Pleeeeeeeeeease?


Crap, I'm starting this tomorrow. Please tell me there's things to look forward to!

henry flower
Posts: 125
Joined: Wed Jul 28, 2010 1:22 am

Re: Themis Bar Review Hangout - July 2015 Exam

Postby henry flower » Wed Jul 01, 2015 9:16 pm

paulshortys10 wrote:
milesdavisjd wrote:
paulshortys10 wrote:Can anyone teach me Supplemental Jurisdiction? I know that its a way of circumventing the SMJ requirements, but I am having trouble learning exactly when it applies and to which parties claims/joinders, and whether diversity need not be broken.


Ok, doing this because I think it will be helpful for me to actually write this out.

Federal Courts must have Subject Matter Jurisdiction (power to decide the matter) and Personal Jurisdiction (power over the parties to the suit). When determining if the court has SMJ, the Predominate Claim must fall under two categories:
1. Federal Question - a claim that arises under federal law.
2. Diversity - (1) No single plaintiff may be a citizen of the same state as any single defendant at the time the lawsuit is filed and (2) the amount in controversy exceeds $75,000 (AIC >$75k).

When there are multiple claims in the dispute, supplemental jurisdiction is the policy that allows a federal court to decide a legal question normally tried in state courts. Claims that normally fall under state jurisdiction must share a common nucleus of operative fact (CNOF) with the Predominate Claim to be litigated in federal court.

If the Predominate Claim is based on a Federal Question, then diversity does not matter. This applies to any new parties, claims, anything.

However, when Predominate Claim is based on federal SMJ due to Diversity (instead of a Federal Question), then, if using supplemental jurisdiction to bring in additional claims or parties, diversity must be maintained when adding new parties or claims to the suit (otherwise it could be litigated in state court).

Below are the requirements to maintain Diversity, so that Supplemental Jurisdiction can still be used to bring in the new claim/party.

Permissive Joinder: CNOF + Diversity (AIC new party >$75k not required)
Compulsory Joinder: CNOF + Diversity (AIC new party >$75k not required) Note: Supplemental jurisdiction in this matter is tricky. The court looks at a variety of factors, like whether the party was intentionally originally left out of the claim so the case could be brought in federal court.
Counterclaims: CNOF + Diversity, (AIC for new claim >$75k not required)
Cross Claims: CNOF (No AIC, No Diversity needed)
Intervenors: CNOF + Diversity
Interpleaders: CNOF + Diversity
Federal Statutory Interpleaders: CNOF + Diversity (between the Stakeholder and ANY defendant) + AIC > $500

Basically, if the jurisdictional basis for the Predominate Claim is Diversity, adding additional parties or claims using supplemental jurisdiction must not destroy diversity, with the exception of cross claims and sometimes compulsory joinders.


Thanks Bro. This is exactly what I was looking for.


For statutory interpleader, it's actually minimal diversity between the claimants. The citizenship of the stakeholder doesn't matter.

And there will almost always be supplemental jurisdiction over compulsory counterclaims, but NOT for permissive counterclaims, which need an independent basis for jurisdiction (i.e., FQ or complete diversity + AIC).

User avatar
kjartan
Posts: 1367
Joined: Thu Oct 02, 2014 12:49 am

Re: Themis Bar Review Hangout - July 2015 Exam

Postby kjartan » Wed Jul 01, 2015 9:39 pm

For the CPTs, how close should we be getting to the model answer? This is the only part of the bar exam that has me freaked out...

User avatar
sd5289
Posts: 1624
Joined: Thu Jun 09, 2011 2:02 pm

Re: Themis Bar Review Hangout - July 2015 Exam

Postby sd5289 » Wed Jul 01, 2015 10:37 pm

MrBriggs360 wrote:
sd5289 wrote:The NY Corp's guy is literally just reading the handout verbatim (generally 2x on each point).

This is killing me.


Annnnd all 11 lectures + the outline are only worth .9%.


I just discovered that.

Forget it, I'm done for the night.

chipperjones
Posts: 28
Joined: Sat Sep 22, 2012 4:16 pm

Re: Themis Bar Review Hangout - July 2015 Exam

Postby chipperjones » Wed Jul 01, 2015 10:41 pm

For the CPTs, how close should we be getting to the model answer? This is the only part of the bar exam that has me freaked out...


The sample answers are often WAY in excess of the character limit imposed by my bar jurisdiction. Hard to know exactly how closely essays should conform, but I think a multitude of rule statements is probably less important than analyzing the issues with the most relevant rule or two.

lost in translation
Posts: 13
Joined: Sat Jun 27, 2015 10:54 pm

Re: Themis Bar Review Hangout - July 2015 Exam

Postby lost in translation » Wed Jul 01, 2015 11:31 pm

somuchbooty wrote:
annapach wrote:Just putting it out there that I got 8/10 on the NCBE practice civ pro questions without even peeking at my notes. For the Themis civ pro questions sometimes i have to go beyond my notes, beyond the long outlines, deep into google, and I STILL get them wrong. I have a feeling they are complete BS and it kind of bothers me that they made them so obscure. What good does that really do us?


fear is a good motivator


agree Annapach - better to know know a few basic trees than get lost in a forest (or something like that)

User avatar
zor
Posts: 263
Joined: Tue Feb 22, 2011 1:36 pm

Re: Themis Bar Review Hangout - July 2015 Exam

Postby zor » Thu Jul 02, 2015 12:10 pm

henry flower wrote:
paulshortys10 wrote:
milesdavisjd wrote:
paulshortys10 wrote:Can anyone teach me Supplemental Jurisdiction? I know that its a way of circumventing the SMJ requirements, but I am having trouble learning exactly when it applies and to which parties claims/joinders, and whether diversity need not be broken.


Ok, doing this because I think it will be helpful for me to actually write this out.

Federal Courts must have Subject Matter Jurisdiction (power to decide the matter) and Personal Jurisdiction (power over the parties to the suit). When determining if the court has SMJ, the Predominate Claim must fall under two categories:
1. Federal Question - a claim that arises under federal law.
2. Diversity - (1) No single plaintiff may be a citizen of the same state as any single defendant at the time the lawsuit is filed and (2) the amount in controversy exceeds $75,000 (AIC >$75k).

When there are multiple claims in the dispute, supplemental jurisdiction is the policy that allows a federal court to decide a legal question normally tried in state courts. Claims that normally fall under state jurisdiction must share a common nucleus of operative fact (CNOF) with the Predominate Claim to be litigated in federal court.

If the Predominate Claim is based on a Federal Question, then diversity does not matter. This applies to any new parties, claims, anything.

However, when Predominate Claim is based on federal SMJ due to Diversity (instead of a Federal Question), then, if using supplemental jurisdiction to bring in additional claims or parties, diversity must be maintained when adding new parties or claims to the suit (otherwise it could be litigated in state court).

Below are the requirements to maintain Diversity, so that Supplemental Jurisdiction can still be used to bring in the new claim/party.

Permissive Joinder: CNOF + Diversity (AIC new party >$75k not required)
Compulsory Joinder: CNOF + Diversity (AIC new party >$75k not required) Note: Supplemental jurisdiction in this matter is tricky. The court looks at a variety of factors, like whether the party was intentionally originally left out of the claim so the case could be brought in federal court.
Counterclaims: CNOF + Diversity, (AIC for new claim >$75k not required)
Cross Claims: CNOF (No AIC, No Diversity needed)
Intervenors: CNOF + Diversity
Interpleaders: CNOF + Diversity
Federal Statutory Interpleaders: CNOF + Diversity (between the Stakeholder and ANY defendant) + AIC > $500

Basically, if the jurisdictional basis for the Predominate Claim is Diversity, adding additional parties or claims using supplemental jurisdiction must not destroy diversity, with the exception of cross claims and sometimes compulsory joinders.


Thanks Bro. This is exactly what I was looking for.


For statutory interpleader, it's actually minimal diversity between the claimants. The citizenship of the stakeholder doesn't matter.

And there will almost always be supplemental jurisdiction over compulsory counterclaims, but NOT for permissive counterclaims, which need an independent basis for jurisdiction (i.e., FQ or complete diversity + AIC).


I thought the lecturer on this (Jeffries) was actually really good. I was so confused by the outline but he broke it down very well.

Does anyone know if the in-person simulated MBE will involve a scantron? My ticket says to bring my test book, so I'm wondering if it's just, like, showing up with your own stuff and then self-grading at the end, in which case, why drag my butt down there...

User avatar
zot1
Posts: 3075
Joined: Thu Jan 31, 2013 12:53 am

Re: Themis Bar Review Hangout - July 2015 Exam

Postby zot1 » Thu Jul 02, 2015 12:27 pm

Finally getting back into the grind and feeling productive like I was in June.

14 assignments between today and tomorrow, including a wills graded essay even though I haven't gotten to wills yet :lol:

It's cool. Just trying to take it one step at a time.

Velours
Posts: 26
Joined: Mon Jun 08, 2015 12:58 pm

Re: Themis Bar Review Hangout - July 2015 Exam

Postby Velours » Thu Jul 02, 2015 12:41 pm

I've been considering doing a set of MBE questions in test mode instead of interactive. Has anyone tried both ways and felt one way was better than the other? I tend to get on a wrong streak so I feel like one wrong answer tends to spiral into more but on the other hand reading the explanations right after helps and sometimes the same rule comes up in a later question during the same set.

User avatar
Pleasye
Posts: 7963
Joined: Sun Mar 14, 2010 4:22 pm

Re: Themis Bar Review Hangout - July 2015 Exam

Postby Pleasye » Thu Jul 02, 2015 12:47 pm

zor wrote:Does anyone know if the in-person simulated MBE will involve a scantron? My ticket says to bring my test book, so I'm wondering if it's just, like, showing up with your own stuff and then self-grading at the end, in which case, why drag my butt down there...

There's a scantron in your book and the date of the simulated MBE (at least the one I signed up for) lines up with the Milestone #3 exam so I'm pretty sure we are just going to do Milestone #3 with a proctor. Pretty sure we will self-grade them.

User avatar
zot1
Posts: 3075
Joined: Thu Jan 31, 2013 12:53 am

Re: Themis Bar Review Hangout - July 2015 Exam

Postby zot1 » Thu Jul 02, 2015 12:51 pm

Velours wrote:I've been considering doing a set of MBE questions in test mode instead of interactive. Has anyone tried both ways and felt one way was better than the other? I tend to get on a wrong streak so I feel like one wrong answer tends to spiral into more but on the other hand reading the explanations right after helps and sometimes the same rule comes up in a later question during the same set.


I feel the same way as you in regards to this ^. However, I feel like because the regular MBE sets are also meant to teach me rules, it makes more sense to do them in interactive mode. I'm not concerned about practicing test mode because the milestone exams already do that.

MrBriggs360
Posts: 59
Joined: Sun Oct 02, 2011 6:28 am

Re: Themis Bar Review Hangout - July 2015 Exam

Postby MrBriggs360 » Thu Jul 02, 2015 1:26 pm

NOTE TO NEW YORKERS:

There is a typo/error on p. 78 of New York Volume 1 regarding the timing of motions. The large outline says that if a motion is sent by overnight mail, you add TWO days to the amount of time you must send it before the return date. However, CPLR 2103(b)(6) says that if it is overnight mail, you add only ONE day. The lecture and lecture handout state the rule correctly.




Return to “Bar Exam Prep and Discussion Forum”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Google [Bot] and 10 guests