Themis Bar Review Hangout - July 2015 Exam

User avatar
zot1
Posts: 3082
Joined: Thu Jan 31, 2013 12:53 am

Re: Themis Bar Review Hangout - July 2015 Exam

Postby zot1 » Fri Jul 17, 2015 12:47 pm

Ok, this is getting super frustrating. Family law again:

Question regarding whether a spouse has any advantage of filing for a fault-based divorce over no fault divorce. My answer was something along the lines of the innocent spouse will be entitled to a greater degree of property and might get more spousal support. Model answer: In most states, the fact that adultery occurred during the marriage is not a factor in the distribution of property. Marital misconduct may be taken into account in many states in determining spousal support. The weight marital misconduct is given in determining alimony is dependent on jurisdiction.

I know that adultery is generally not a factor in distribution of property, but I believe this is the case ONLY for no fault divorce. Aren't the rules for the model answer again misstating the rules? (especially considering page 7 of the lecture handout?)

always_raining
Posts: 102
Joined: Fri Jul 13, 2012 3:27 pm

Re: Themis Bar Review Hangout - July 2015 Exam

Postby always_raining » Fri Jul 17, 2015 1:00 pm

zot1 wrote:Family law:

I had a question before where in the fact pattern, a dude requested a paternity action of a four y/o, but the state had an SOL barring actions after three years. I answered that that was not allowed based on what I remembered at the time, the model answer said the time required by the state was "reasonable" so it was okay.

Re-reading the family law lecture outline I see that in page 15 it says "States cannot limit the time allowed for a claim of paternity to be brought before the child reaches the age of majority."

Am I missing something or was the model answer wrong?



They can limit it for the father, but cannot limit it for the child. If they limit it for the child, the statute gets intermediate scrutiny.
Edit: See page 31 of the outline under "unwed biological father" and compare to page 20 "unconstitutional time limit on paternity action." When the mother or child brings a paternity action, there can be no time limit, but when the father fails to assert paternity and is not married to the mother, the state can impose time limits.

User avatar
zot1
Posts: 3082
Joined: Thu Jan 31, 2013 12:53 am

Re: Themis Bar Review Hangout - July 2015 Exam

Postby zot1 » Fri Jul 17, 2015 1:12 pm

always_raining wrote:
zot1 wrote:Family law:

I had a question before where in the fact pattern, a dude requested a paternity action of a four y/o, but the state had an SOL barring actions after three years. I answered that that was not allowed based on what I remembered at the time, the model answer said the time required by the state was "reasonable" so it was okay.

Re-reading the family law lecture outline I see that in page 15 it says "States cannot limit the time allowed for a claim of paternity to be brought before the child reaches the age of majority."

Am I missing something or was the model answer wrong?



They can limit it for the father, but cannot limit it for the child. If they limit it for the child, the statute gets intermediate scrutiny.
Edit: See page 31 of the outline under "unwed biological father" and compare to page 20 "unconstitutional time limit on paternity action." When the mother or child brings a paternity action, there can be no time limit, but when the father fails to assert paternity and is not married to the mother, the state can impose time limits.


Ah! Thanks for clearing that up!

always_raining
Posts: 102
Joined: Fri Jul 13, 2012 3:27 pm

Re: Themis Bar Review Hangout - July 2015 Exam

Postby always_raining » Fri Jul 17, 2015 1:14 pm

zot1 wrote:Ok, this is getting super frustrating. Family law again:

Question regarding whether a spouse has any advantage of filing for a fault-based divorce over no fault divorce. My answer was something along the lines of the innocent spouse will be entitled to a greater degree of property and might get more spousal support. Model answer: In most states, the fact that adultery occurred during the marriage is not a factor in the distribution of property. Marital misconduct may be taken into account in many states in determining spousal support. The weight marital misconduct is given in determining alimony is dependent on jurisdiction.

I know that adultery is generally not a factor in distribution of property, but I believe this is the case ONLY for no fault divorce. Aren't the rules for the model answer again misstating the rules? (especially considering page 7 of the lecture handout?)


Page 12 of the outline under "Factors in the distribution of marital property" says that "the fact that divorce is granted on a fault ground, such as adultery, is not a factor. However, dissipation of marital property may be a factor."

I got it wrong too. I assumed that the fault was relevant to something else in the divorce, not just the divorce itself. Think of it like this: in some states there has to be a reason to get divorce (fault) and other states there doesn't have to be a specific reason (no fault) but either way, fault is not considered when distributing property (unless there was dissipation).

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

Re: Themis Bar Review Hangout - July 2015 Exam

Postby somuchbooty » Fri Jul 17, 2015 1:16 pm

If we all refuse to write essays, they'll have to just grade us on our MBEs. The revolution can start here.

User avatar
skrubba5025
Posts: 21
Joined: Fri Mar 02, 2012 11:24 pm

Re: Themis Bar Review Hangout - July 2015 Exam

Postby skrubba5025 » Fri Jul 17, 2015 1:17 pm

always_raining wrote:
zot1 wrote:Ok, this is getting super frustrating. Family law again:

Question regarding whether a spouse has any advantage of filing for a fault-based divorce over no fault divorce. My answer was something along the lines of the innocent spouse will be entitled to a greater degree of property and might get more spousal support. Model answer: In most states, the fact that adultery occurred during the marriage is not a factor in the distribution of property. Marital misconduct may be taken into account in many states in determining spousal support. The weight marital misconduct is given in determining alimony is dependent on jurisdiction.

I know that adultery is generally not a factor in distribution of property, but I believe this is the case ONLY for no fault divorce. Aren't the rules for the model answer again misstating the rules? (especially considering page 7 of the lecture handout?)


Page 12 of the outline under "Factors in the distribution of marital property" says that "the fact that divorce is granted on a fault ground, such as adultery, is not a factor. However, dissipation of marital property may be a factor."

I got it wrong too. I assumed that the fault was relevant to something else in the divorce, not just the divorce itself. Think of it like this: in some states there has to be a reason to get divorce (fault) and other states there doesn't have to be a specific reason (no fault) but either way, fault is not considered when distributing property (unless there was dissipation).


Fault can also be considered in Spousal Maintenance determinations in a No-Fault Jurisdiction, correct?

User avatar
zot1
Posts: 3082
Joined: Thu Jan 31, 2013 12:53 am

Re: Themis Bar Review Hangout - July 2015 Exam

Postby zot1 » Fri Jul 17, 2015 1:18 pm

always_raining wrote:
zot1 wrote:Ok, this is getting super frustrating. Family law again:

Question regarding whether a spouse has any advantage of filing for a fault-based divorce over no fault divorce. My answer was something along the lines of the innocent spouse will be entitled to a greater degree of property and might get more spousal support. Model answer: In most states, the fact that adultery occurred during the marriage is not a factor in the distribution of property. Marital misconduct may be taken into account in many states in determining spousal support. The weight marital misconduct is given in determining alimony is dependent on jurisdiction.

I know that adultery is generally not a factor in distribution of property, but I believe this is the case ONLY for no fault divorce. Aren't the rules for the model answer again misstating the rules? (especially considering page 7 of the lecture handout?)


Page 12 of the outline under "Factors in the distribution of marital property" says that "the fact that divorce is granted on a fault ground, such as adultery, is not a factor. However, dissipation of marital property may be a factor."

I got it wrong too. I assumed that the fault was relevant to something else in the divorce, not just the divorce itself. Think of it like this: in some states there has to be a reason to get divorce (fault) and other states there doesn't have to be a specific reason (no fault) but either way, fault is not considered when distributing property (unless there was dissipation).


So I should just assume page 7 of the lecture handout is wrong? Because it specifically says there that both property and spousal support would be affected by filing at-fault divorce. :(

eloise16
Posts: 67
Joined: Mon Jun 15, 2015 2:48 pm

Re: Themis Bar Review Hangout - July 2015 Exam

Postby eloise16 » Fri Jul 17, 2015 1:20 pm

somuchbooty wrote:If we all refuse to write essays, they'll have to just grade us on our MBEs. The revolution can start here.



Themis emailed us MD peeps today to nicely remind us that our MBE is only worth 33.3% and the rest is based on our essays :shock:

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

Re: Themis Bar Review Hangout - July 2015 Exam

Postby Confused7 » Fri Jul 17, 2015 1:28 pm

More NY family law stuff...I'm really confused as to how adopted out kids can get their share in wills. I thought the rule was that they had to be specifically mentioned in the biological parent's will to get stuff. But there's also that test with the factors (if decedent died after 8/31/1987, if decedent was the adopted child's grandparent or descendent of a grandparent, and if the adopted parent is married to the child's biological parent). When do we apply each? I asked Themis but they weren't very clear.

smalogna
Posts: 119
Joined: Thu May 28, 2015 2:25 pm

Re: Themis Bar Review Hangout - July 2015 Exam

Postby smalogna » Fri Jul 17, 2015 1:28 pm

Killed the last NY graded essay, bring on the bar!!!.....*goes back to studying for another week and a half*

always_raining
Posts: 102
Joined: Fri Jul 13, 2012 3:27 pm

Re: Themis Bar Review Hangout - July 2015 Exam

Postby always_raining » Fri Jul 17, 2015 1:34 pm

zot1 wrote:
always_raining wrote:
zot1 wrote:Ok, this is getting super frustrating. Family law again:

Question regarding whether a spouse has any advantage of filing for a fault-based divorce over no fault divorce. My answer was something along the lines of the innocent spouse will be entitled to a greater degree of property and might get more spousal support. Model answer: In most states, the fact that adultery occurred during the marriage is not a factor in the distribution of property. Marital misconduct may be taken into account in many states in determining spousal support. The weight marital misconduct is given in determining alimony is dependent on jurisdiction.

I know that adultery is generally not a factor in distribution of property, but I believe this is the case ONLY for no fault divorce. Aren't the rules for the model answer again misstating the rules? (especially considering page 7 of the lecture handout?)


Page 12 of the outline under "Factors in the distribution of marital property" says that "the fact that divorce is granted on a fault ground, such as adultery, is not a factor. However, dissipation of marital property may be a factor."

I got it wrong too. I assumed that the fault was relevant to something else in the divorce, not just the divorce itself. Think of it like this: in some states there has to be a reason to get divorce (fault) and other states there doesn't have to be a specific reason (no fault) but either way, fault is not considered when distributing property (unless there was dissipation).


So I should just assume page 7 of the lecture handout is wrong? Because it specifically says there that both property and spousal support would be affected by filing at-fault divorce. :(


ummmm just dug that piece of garbage out of a pile of useless papers (where it belongs) and yes, the lecture handout is incorrect. The only redeeming thing I can think of is that the REAL outline says "in most states, fault is not a factor," thereby saying that in some states fault might be a factor. So the lecture outline isnt totally incorrect since the minority of states allow fault as a factor (though, the lecture handout makes it sound like all states allow fault as a factor).

I hate the lecture handouts.
Last edited by always_raining on Fri Jul 17, 2015 1:36 pm, edited 1 time in total.

caminante
Posts: 208
Joined: Thu Jun 16, 2011 12:59 pm

Re: Themis Bar Review Hangout - July 2015 Exam

Postby caminante » Fri Jul 17, 2015 1:35 pm

eloise16 wrote:
somuchbooty wrote:If we all refuse to write essays, they'll have to just grade us on our MBEs. The revolution can start here.



Themis emailed us MD peeps today to nicely remind us that our MBE is only worth 33.3% and the rest is based on our essays :shock:


And yet Themis's MD-specific materials are so crappy compared to the MBE material :evil:

I thought the MD bar was supposed to be on the easy side, but right now it really doesn't seem that way. I am still struggling to get down coherent answers on the essays within the 25-minute time limit... why must they make us rush so much?

eloise16
Posts: 67
Joined: Mon Jun 15, 2015 2:48 pm

Re: Themis Bar Review Hangout - July 2015 Exam

Postby eloise16 » Fri Jul 17, 2015 1:43 pm

caminante wrote:
eloise16 wrote:
somuchbooty wrote:If we all refuse to write essays, they'll have to just grade us on our MBEs. The revolution can start here.



Themis emailed us MD peeps today to nicely remind us that our MBE is only worth 33.3% and the rest is based on our essays :shock:


And yet Themis's MD-specific materials are so crappy compared to the MBE material :evil:

I thought the MD bar was supposed to be on the easy side, but right now it really doesn't seem that way. I am still struggling to get down coherent answers on the essays within the 25-minute time limit... why must they make us rush so much?


Same. I am seriously terrified about the essays being worth so much considering I have little to no accurate knowledge about non-MBE Md subjects like corporations, secured transactions, and corporations...

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

Re: Themis Bar Review Hangout - July 2015 Exam

Postby somuchbooty » Fri Jul 17, 2015 1:45 pm

Admittedly, I'm not even worried about the MBE anymore, but I'm 10 times more worried about the essays now that I've realized I can't write one without looking up a few things first in my notes.

I don't even know how to fix this. Review every possible essay subject for like 2 hours each? Read a ton of sample essays for each subject? All these prompts seem different so that scares me.

kateebee
Posts: 45
Joined: Thu Jun 11, 2015 5:24 pm

Re: Themis Bar Review Hangout - July 2015 Exam

Postby kateebee » Fri Jul 17, 2015 1:52 pm

eloise16 wrote:
caminante wrote:
eloise16 wrote:
somuchbooty wrote:If we all refuse to write essays, they'll have to just grade us on our MBEs. The revolution can start here.



Themis emailed us MD peeps today to nicely remind us that our MBE is only worth 33.3% and the rest is based on our essays :shock:


And yet Themis's MD-specific materials are so crappy compared to the MBE material :evil:

I thought the MD bar was supposed to be on the easy side, but right now it really doesn't seem that way. I am still struggling to get down coherent answers on the essays within the 25-minute time limit... why must they make us rush so much?


Same. I am seriously terrified about the essays being worth so much considering I have little to no accurate knowledge about non-MBE Md subjects like corporations, secured transactions, and corporations...



After doing (slightly) above average on the Simulated MBE yesterday, I was feeling so good. And then I got that email. Back to panic-mode. The good news is that I feel like the sample answers for the non-MBE subjects have been a little easier. Not as intense as the contracts, property, torts, etc. sample answers. So maybe there's some hope in that. Also the student answers for those subjects seem to be almost as clueless as mine are.

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

Re: Themis Bar Review Hangout - July 2015 Exam

Postby kjartan » Fri Jul 17, 2015 1:55 pm

somuchbooty wrote:Admittedly, I'm not even worried about the MBE anymore, but I'm 10 times more worried about the essays now that I've realized I can't write one without looking up a few things first in my notes.

I don't even know how to fix this. Review every possible essay subject for like 2 hours each? Read a ton of sample essays for each subject? All these prompts seem different so that scares me.

LOL me neither. I can usually spot the issue, but I need to turn to my notes to give a good rule statement.

eloise16
Posts: 67
Joined: Mon Jun 15, 2015 2:48 pm

Re: Themis Bar Review Hangout - July 2015 Exam

Postby eloise16 » Fri Jul 17, 2015 1:56 pm

kateebee wrote:
eloise16 wrote:
caminante wrote:
eloise16 wrote:
somuchbooty wrote:If we all refuse to write essays, they'll have to just grade us on our MBEs. The revolution can start here.



Themis emailed us MD peeps today to nicely remind us that our MBE is only worth 33.3% and the rest is based on our essays :shock:


And yet Themis's MD-specific materials are so crappy compared to the MBE material :evil:

I thought the MD bar was supposed to be on the easy side, but right now it really doesn't seem that way. I am still struggling to get down coherent answers on the essays within the 25-minute time limit... why must they make us rush so much?


Same. I am seriously terrified about the essays being worth so much considering I have little to no accurate knowledge about non-MBE Md subjects like corporations, secured transactions, and corporations...



After doing (slightly) above average on the Simulated MBE yesterday, I was feeling so good. And then I got that email. Back to panic-mode. The good news is that I feel like the sample answers for the non-MBE subjects have been a little easier. Not as intense as the contracts, property, torts, etc. sample answers. So maybe there's some hope in that. Also the student answers for those subjects seem to be almost as clueless as mine are.


Same. exact. story. I got above a 70% (FINALLY) on a mixed MBE set last night and was on sort of a high and then got that email and hit an all new low. But I definitely agree that the sample answers aren't as perfect as the core MBE essay answers are. I'm more worried because t's not even really about memory for me as much as it is that I fundamentally still don't understand a lot of the non-MBE material, and no amount of rereading my notes is going to change that.

always_raining
Posts: 102
Joined: Fri Jul 13, 2012 3:27 pm

Re: Themis Bar Review Hangout - July 2015 Exam

Postby always_raining » Fri Jul 17, 2015 1:57 pm

kjartan wrote:
somuchbooty wrote:Admittedly, I'm not even worried about the MBE anymore, but I'm 10 times more worried about the essays now that I've realized I can't write one without looking up a few things first in my notes.

I don't even know how to fix this. Review every possible essay subject for like 2 hours each? Read a ton of sample essays for each subject? All these prompts seem different so that scares me.

LOL me neither. I can usually spot the issue, but I need to turn to my notes to give a good rule statement.


I started making flashcards...it has helped a lot for certain subjects (conflicts/family law/corporations) but takes a lot of time and is so painful on the hand. Not used to writing things out. I used to use online flash cards though (a program called Anki allows you to make your own on your computer) and that was helpful as well/faster.

aladdinismyprince
Posts: 83
Joined: Sun Dec 11, 2011 1:33 am

Re: Themis Bar Review Hangout - July 2015 Exam

Postby aladdinismyprince » Fri Jul 17, 2015 2:04 pm

caminante wrote:
eloise16 wrote:
somuchbooty wrote:If we all refuse to write essays, they'll have to just grade us on our MBEs. The revolution can start here.



Themis emailed us MD peeps today to nicely remind us that our MBE is only worth 33.3% and the rest is based on our essays :shock:


And yet Themis's MD-specific materials are so crappy compared to the MBE material :evil:

I thought the MD bar was supposed to be on the easy side, but right now it really doesn't seem that way. I am still struggling to get down coherent answers on the essays within the 25-minute time limit... why must they make us rush so much?


I have the same problem with FL as you do with MD. MBE material is pretty decent, but the state-specific FL materials are really bad all around. Lectures are bad. Outlines are bad. Answer explanations are bad. I'm not impressed.

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

Re: Themis Bar Review Hangout - July 2015 Exam

Postby kjartan » Fri Jul 17, 2015 2:18 pm

Someone please explain this to crimlaw question to me.
[+] Spoiler
A woman and two co-workers agreed to go to their office and take some jewelry that was in a colleague's desk. As they entered the office, they were arrested and all three were charged with conspiracy to commit larceny. The events occurred in a common-law jurisdiction. The woman testified that she suspected the two acquaintances of being thieves and joined up with them in order to catch them. She also testified that she made an anonymous telephone call to the police alerting them to the crime and that the call caused the police to be waiting for them when they walked into the office.

If the jury believes the woman, it should find her:
A. guilty, because there was an agreement and the entry into the office is sufficient for the overt act.
B. guilty, because she is not a police officer and thus cannot claim any privilege of apprehending criminals.
C. not guilty, because she did not intend to steal.
D. not guilty, because she prevented the theft from occurring.

[+] Spoiler
Answer choice C is correct. A conspiracy occurs when two or more persons agree to achieve an unlawful objective with the specific intent to commit the crime. Although there was an agreement between the parties, the woman did not intend to steal from the colleague. Rather, she told police of the plan so they could catch the two co-workers. Without the intent to steal, the woman cannot be found guilty. Answer choice A is incorrect because it ignores the mens rea aspect of conspiracy. Here, the woman did not have the requisite intent. Answer choice B is incorrect as the woman is not claiming any privilege as a defense. The woman, however, did not possess the requisite mental state required to complete conspiracy to commit larceny. Answer choice D is incorrect because prevention of the theft does not eliminate a conspirator's liability. Even if the end result was unsuccessful, the conspirator is still guilty for the conspiracy.The foregoing NCBE MBE question has been modified to reflect current NCBE stylistic approaches; the NCBE has not reviewed or endorsed this modification.

[+] Spoiler
How am I supposed to infer that she did not intend to steal from the colleague?

always_raining
Posts: 102
Joined: Fri Jul 13, 2012 3:27 pm

Re: Themis Bar Review Hangout - July 2015 Exam

Postby always_raining » Fri Jul 17, 2015 2:29 pm

kjartan wrote:Someone please explain this to crimlaw question to me.
[+] Spoiler
A woman and two co-workers agreed to go to their office and take some jewelry that was in a colleague's desk. As they entered the office, they were arrested and all three were charged with conspiracy to commit larceny. The events occurred in a common-law jurisdiction. The woman testified that she suspected the two acquaintances of being thieves and joined up with them in order to catch them. She also testified that she made an anonymous telephone call to the police alerting them to the crime and that the call caused the police to be waiting for them when they walked into the office.

If the jury believes the woman, it should find her:
A. guilty, because there was an agreement and the entry into the office is sufficient for the overt act.
B. guilty, because she is not a police officer and thus cannot claim any privilege of apprehending criminals.
C. not guilty, because she did not intend to steal.
D. not guilty, because she prevented the theft from occurring.

[+] Spoiler
Answer choice C is correct. A conspiracy occurs when two or more persons agree to achieve an unlawful objective with the specific intent to commit the crime. Although there was an agreement between the parties, the woman did not intend to steal from the colleague. Rather, she told police of the plan so they could catch the two co-workers. Without the intent to steal, the woman cannot be found guilty. Answer choice A is incorrect because it ignores the mens rea aspect of conspiracy. Here, the woman did not have the requisite intent. Answer choice B is incorrect as the woman is not claiming any privilege as a defense. The woman, however, did not possess the requisite mental state required to complete conspiracy to commit larceny. Answer choice D is incorrect because prevention of the theft does not eliminate a conspirator's liability. Even if the end result was unsuccessful, the conspirator is still guilty for the conspiracy.The foregoing NCBE MBE question has been modified to reflect current NCBE stylistic approaches; the NCBE has not reviewed or endorsed this modification.

[+] Spoiler
How am I supposed to infer that she did not intend to steal from the colleague?


The question says "if the jury believes the woman" — the woman claims she suspected her friends were thieves, joined them, and called the police to catch them in the act. So, if the jury believes her story, then her intent was not to steal, but rather to get the two friends caught. Not sure if that clarifies it?

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 » Fri Jul 17, 2015 2:31 pm

[+] Spoiler
"The woman testified that she suspected the two acquaintances of being thieves and joined up with them in order to catch them." She wasn't engaged in a conspiracy to commit theft; she only joined them to help the police. If that were true, she can't be guilty of a conspiracy, which requires an agreement in furtherance of a crime.

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

Re: Themis Bar Review Hangout - July 2015 Exam

Postby kjartan » Fri Jul 17, 2015 2:41 pm

always_raining wrote:The question says "if the jury believes the woman" — the woman claims she suspected her friends were thieves, joined them, and called the police to catch them in the act. So, if the jury believes her story, then her intent was not to steal, but rather to get the two friends caught. Not sure if that clarifies it?

OK, I just realized that I misconstrued "joined up with them." Themis meant "joined up with them" in the conspiracy, whereas I thought they meant "joined up with them" at the scene where the crime was to occur.

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

Re: Themis Bar Review Hangout - July 2015 Exam

Postby Confused7 » Fri Jul 17, 2015 2:59 pm

After almost 10 mixed MBE sets of not even breaking 69% I suddenly got a 83% in today's set. :shock: :shock: :shock: I wish I could feel better but I really think it was a fluke.

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

Re: Themis Bar Review Hangout - July 2015 Exam

Postby sd5289 » Fri Jul 17, 2015 3:00 pm

zor wrote:
smalogna wrote:
paulshortys10 wrote:Anyone have an easy method to remember character evidence?


First question: Criminal or civil? If criminal move to analysis...
Defendant must open door first either through their offering of evidence about their own character or character of a victim to prove self-defense
On direct exam, only reputation or opinion evidence
Cross exam can bring in specific instances
Must all be pertinent to the trait introduced


Add to this, no extrinsic evidence to prove/disprove specific instances. If you're crossing someone, and you KNOW they robbed a bank last year, and they say they didn't, you have to live with that answer.


I'd add to this (based on what I've bolded above) that it CAN come in with a civil case IF the character trait is the underlying issue in the suit, e.g. a defamation action, negligent hiring (the character trait of the tortious employee that was hired), etc. Mind you this is a very narrow exception to the rule on character evidence in a civil trial.




Return to “Bar Exam Prep and Discussion Forum”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 4 guests