Themis Bar Review Hangout - July 2015 Exam

jadasistgoodja
Posts: 11
Joined: Fri Jun 12, 2015 9:06 am

Re: Themis Bar Review Hangout - July 2015 Exam

Postby jadasistgoodja » Fri Jul 24, 2015 3:38 pm

sd5289 wrote:
jadasistgoodja wrote:Hi guys,

What kind of % are you hitting on the mixed MBE sets at this stage?

(I don't mean to be icky, I find it super helpful to know what % other people are getting)

I weirdly keep hitting exactly 70% .. like I can't score any higher or lower. It's like Themis has programmed me to hit the goal, and only the goal, nothing more, nothing less.

Is anyone else experiencing this type of super consistency or is your % deviating more?

Thanks!

I can't study anymore either.


Yes. I've pretty much been hitting the exact same % over the past 3-4 sets. (note: there were requests a while back in this thread to not post your scores because everyone's at different stages, FYI)

And I also can't study anymore. I just want to take it like yesterday.


Well sure, I understand that. I wanted to post about it because I keep scoring the same % exactly (which also happens to be the goal), which I think objectively speaking is quite a strange phenomenon. I was interested in finding out others views as to whether it is something more than just pure chance, some type of design, if you get my meaning?

I agree that comparison of the scores themselves is probably largely redundant and counterproductive at this stage. Just wondered if anyone else had the same type of experience.

User avatar
zot1
Posts: 3142
Joined: Thu Jan 31, 2013 12:53 am

Re: Themis Bar Review Hangout - July 2015 Exam

Postby zot1 » Fri Jul 24, 2015 3:41 pm

sd5289 wrote:
zot1 wrote:What did you do yesterday?


Oh sorry, was trying to emphasize how ready I am for this to be over with. Not that I simulated an entire bar exam yesterday. I think yesterday I reviewed some stuff, did a short MBE set, and...yep, that was it. Better do an essay or two today.

I'm so tired I'm barely capable of stringing words together to form a coherent sentence.


I hear ya. I'm on a 1 MBE + 2 essays + review schedule, and I seriously dread waking up or getting through the day these days. 5ish o'clock has become my favorite time of the day.

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

Re: Themis Bar Review Hangout - July 2015 Exam

Postby eloise16 » Fri Jul 24, 2015 3:43 pm

jadasistgoodja wrote:
sd5289 wrote:
jadasistgoodja wrote:Hi guys,

What kind of % are you hitting on the mixed MBE sets at this stage?

(I don't mean to be icky, I find it super helpful to know what % other people are getting)

I weirdly keep hitting exactly 70% .. like I can't score any higher or lower. It's like Themis has programmed me to hit the goal, and only the goal, nothing more, nothing less.

Is anyone else experiencing this type of super consistency or is your % deviating more?

Thanks!

I can't study anymore either.


Yes. I've pretty much been hitting the exact same % over the past 3-4 sets. (note: there were requests a while back in this thread to not post your scores because everyone's at different stages, FYI)

And I also can't study anymore. I just want to take it like yesterday.


Well sure, I understand that. I wanted to post about it because I keep scoring the same % exactly (which also happens to be the goal), which I think objectively speaking is quite a strange phenomenon. I was interested in finding out others views as to whether it is something more than just pure chance, some type of design, if you get my meaning?

I agree that comparison of the scores themselves is probably largely redundant and counterproductive at this stage. Just wondered if anyone else had the same type of experience.


My scores had been fluctuating A LOT earlier this week and last week on the mixed sets. Like... I would see 15 point differences and it was seriously screwing with my head. But for the past few sets it has evened out again (give or take 5 or so points). Has not been as consistent as yours though! Wish it was. It would make me feel a lot better.

User avatar
anon sequitur
Posts: 506
Joined: Sun Jun 10, 2012 2:14 am

Re: Themis Bar Review Hangout - July 2015 Exam

Postby anon sequitur » Fri Jul 24, 2015 3:46 pm

cut out caffeine to help me sleep better about two weeks ago (I was having trouble sleeping due to anxiety and staying up late drinking coke zero/iced tea wasn't helping). Now I'm sleeping okay, but have an overwhelming need to take a nap in the middle of the day, which makes it harder to get to sleep at night, which makes it harder to get up early, which makes me want to take a nap, ad nauseum. Anyway, this is annoying. I need to take a tranquilizer at 10pm or something.

But, I'm gonna have a quadruple esspresso during lunch break on day two before the second half of the MBE. Already looking forward to it.

Anyway, just thought I'd whine a little instead of outlining essays.

User avatar
zot1
Posts: 3142
Joined: Thu Jan 31, 2013 12:53 am

Re: Themis Bar Review Hangout - July 2015 Exam

Postby zot1 » Fri Jul 24, 2015 3:47 pm

Family law question:

[+] Spoiler
I just did an essay on family law where the father signed a separation agreement agreeing to a certain child support amount. Thereafter, he found out that he was not the father of the kid and he asked the court to revise the agreement so that he didn't have to pay child support anymore since he wasn't the father (let's be clear here, even if he was hurt, that's still a dick move to the kid).

Anyhow, I immediately went into analysis of paternity estoppel (a putative father may be estopped from refusing to pay child support...) because that seemed right to me. BUT the model answer went into an analysis of how there may have been some fraud if the mom had known ahead of time that he wasn't the real father (there was nothing in the facts to suggest that the mom knew btw) and that in that instance the court should have allowed the modification AND THE DAMN ANSWER DID NOT MENTION ESTOPPEL AT ALL.

Am I missing something here or was the model answer writer just drinking too much tequila while writing this?

User avatar
ThreeRivers
Posts: 1142
Joined: Thu Sep 01, 2011 12:54 am

Re: Themis Bar Review Hangout - July 2015 Exam

Postby ThreeRivers » Fri Jul 24, 2015 3:57 pm

In desperate need of some help.

I've been studying primarily with the lecture handouts. I had a folder saved "MBE" and a folder saved "PA". My PA folder somehow disappeared (I've spent way too long trying to recover it). Anyone taking PA and have the lecture handouts filled in / willing to send them to me?

Appreciate any help anyone can offer

lilypad144
Posts: 31
Joined: Sun Jun 03, 2012 12:07 am

Re: Themis Bar Review Hangout - July 2015 Exam

Postby lilypad144 » Fri Jul 24, 2015 4:04 pm

ThreeRivers wrote:In desperate need of some help.

I've been studying primarily with the lecture handouts. I had a folder saved "MBE" and a folder saved "PA". My PA folder somehow disappeared (I've spent way too long trying to recover it). Anyone taking PA and have the lecture handouts filled in / willing to send them to me?

Appreciate any help anyone can offer


If no one here has them, you can call themis. Unfortunately, they wont make it easy for you, but they DO have the filled out handouts. I called for one chapter a week ago, which I threw away by mistake and I hand write and had no backup. She kept telling me they'd mail them like POSTAL MAIL and said thats all she could do. I then pointed out that a friend of mine lost all of his due to a harddrive crash and they provided them and she was like um, well yeah...that's a harddrive crash. I burst into tears and hung up. She then emailed them to me with an apology.

So....it's doable. I'd call and explain your harddrive crashed and cry alot. Good luck!

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

Re: Themis Bar Review Hangout - July 2015 Exam

Postby kateebee » Fri Jul 24, 2015 4:12 pm

Underoath wrote:
LOL HAHAHAHA I fuckin love this....because I have avoided essays this entire time as well.....what mixed set are you on? I'm barely on 12


I just finished Mixed Set 11. I am going to study Crim Law for a little bit, do that final specific MBE set. Tomorrow, review property and do that final MBE set. Then one Mixed MBE each day plus reviewing state specific and outlining some essays.

But after I typed that out, I laughed, because there's no way I will do that much. I am exhausted and completely out of motivation. Coasting in to these final days, and praying three years of law school, six weeks of intense study, above average writing skills, and a zen state of mind will get me a passing score.

Wishing you all the best! Very grateful for this outlet over the past few weeks.

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 24, 2015 4:17 pm

zot1 wrote:Family law question:

[+] Spoiler
I just did an essay on family law where the father signed a separation agreement agreeing to a certain child support amount. Thereafter, he found out that he was not the father of the kid and he asked the court to revise the agreement so that he didn't have to pay child support anymore since he wasn't the father (let's be clear here, even if he was hurt, that's still a dick move to the kid).

Anyhow, I immediately went into analysis of paternity estoppel (a putative father may be estopped from refusing to pay child support...) because that seemed right to me. BUT the model answer went into an analysis of how there may have been some fraud if the mom had known ahead of time that he wasn't the real father (there was nothing in the facts to suggest that the mom knew btw) and that in that instance the court should have allowed the modification AND THE DAMN ANSWER DID NOT MENTION ESTOPPEL AT ALL.

Am I missing something here or was the model answer writer just drinking too much tequila while writing this?


:lol: I mean, I know it's national tequila day and all... (according to the Twitters anyway)

As for the question, paternity estoppel applies to fathers who know they're not the father (think step-father or the equivalent), and the bio dad is long gone. So he holds the kid out as his, pays expenses, etc. for a period of time. Then, mom and dude get into a massive fight and break up, and dude disappears and says fuck you to mom (seriously I've heard much worse in family court). Estoppel applies to this kind of a situation, not a married father (you mentioned a separation agreement) who doesn't know that the child isn't his...I'm assuming mom cheated in this situation.

I agree with you that I'm not sure how you were expected to see the mom knows kid's not his, except maybe that she didn't tell him about the affair when she became pregnant? But I do see fraud if mom knows it's not his, but let's him assume it is.

Weird question. I don't really remember seeing a fraud like that come up in the lectures or outline.

juniormint33
Posts: 46
Joined: Sun Jul 19, 2015 5:28 pm

Re: Themis Bar Review Hangout - July 2015 Exam

Postby juniormint33 » Fri Jul 24, 2015 4:29 pm

lilypad144 wrote:
ThreeRivers wrote:In desperate need of some help.

I've been studying primarily with the lecture handouts. I had a folder saved "MBE" and a folder saved "PA". My PA folder somehow disappeared (I've spent way too long trying to recover it). Anyone taking PA and have the lecture handouts filled in / willing to send them to me?

Appreciate any help anyone can offer


If no one here has them, you can call themis. Unfortunately, they wont make it easy for you, but they DO have the filled out handouts. I called for one chapter a week ago, which I threw away by mistake and I hand write and had no backup. She kept telling me they'd mail them like POSTAL MAIL and said thats all she could do. I then pointed out that a friend of mine lost all of his due to a harddrive crash and they provided them and she was like um, well yeah...that's a harddrive crash. I burst into tears and hung up. She then emailed them to me with an apology.

So....it's doable. I'd call and explain your harddrive crashed and cry alot. Good luck!


When in doubt, cry.

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

Re: Themis Bar Review Hangout - July 2015 Exam

Postby Pickled » Fri Jul 24, 2015 4:56 pm

jadasistgoodja wrote:Hi guys,

What kind of % are you hitting on the mixed MBE sets at this stage?

(I don't mean to be icky, I find it super helpful to know what % other people are getting)

I weirdly keep hitting exactly 70% .. like I can't score any higher or lower. It's like Themis has programmed me to hit the goal, and only the goal, nothing more, nothing less.

Is anyone else experiencing this type of super consistency or is your % deviating more?

Thanks!

I can't study anymore either.


I was experiencing the same thing. Had 10 straight sets within a couple points, but then came set 15. Ugh. Dropped 10.

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

Re: Themis Bar Review Hangout - July 2015 Exam

Postby zor » Fri Jul 24, 2015 5:01 pm

Finally did the simulated essays today and have a question about the contract one.

For the Cottages question, I wrote this whole long thing about the Statute of Frauds does bar the oral contract BUT it's excused by part performance because the guy obviously has possession and as arguably made substantial improvements. The model answer didn't mention this at all, but was entirely about adverse possession.

So 1) why isn't the SoF waived because of part performance? Is it lack of consideration because it was a gratuitous promise?
2) How does adverse possession apply when for the first ten years or whatever when the guy had permission from his friend? That's not hostile... his friend thought he gave it to him, so the friend's interest were not adverse to the guy's interests?

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 24, 2015 5:14 pm

zor wrote:Finally did the simulated essays today and have a question about the contract one.

For the Cottages question, I wrote this whole long thing about the Statute of Frauds does bar the oral contract BUT it's excused by part performance because the guy obviously has possession and as arguably made substantial improvements. The model answer didn't mention this at all, but was entirely about adverse possession.

So 1) why isn't the SoF waived because of part performance? Is it lack of consideration because it was a gratuitous promise?
2) How does adverse possession apply when for the first ten years or whatever when the guy had permission from his friend? That's not hostile... his friend thought he gave it to him, so the friend's interest were not adverse to the guy's interests?


I'm looking back on my answer on that one, and I went the AP route too. I did this a little while ago, but if I remember correctly, I initially though "oh shit SOF," but then that went out the window when Sam sold the property "owned" by Pete to Dave. I can see in my answer that I wrote Sam initially gave it to Pete as a "gift" (I think I went there because the fact pattern said he gave it to them because of their "past friendship," which I construed as a gift since it's not consideration). Looks like I also latched onto the facts in the fact pattern that discussed insurance, phone, electricity, no trespassing signs, bars and locks, and (especially) that he "repelled" trespassers.

I also latched onto the consent part in the AP analysis, but once Sam conveyed it to Dave, he no longer had the ability to consent. I then just added up the time when Pete's hostile possession to Dave started (in 2000) and the fact that Dave's legal actions against Tim occurred in the beginning of 2011 to get 10+ years of AP. The fact pattern didn't mention anything about Dave and Pete interacting at all, so I think you had to make a couple of inferences to get to this one. All of the facts in the fact pattern about everything Pete did to and with the property were hints that his possession was open, notorious, and hostile to Dave's interest.

I think the key to this question is that there was no contract between Sam and Pete. Sam gave Pete the property because they were friends. That =/= consideration. SOF applies to contracts, not gifts.

Hope this helps!

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 24, 2015 5:21 pm

As for me, question on one of the NY Torts essay PQ's:

[+] Spoiler
Torts fact pattern about a rear-end collision while P was sitting at a red light (hint: it's the one where the P is drunk, and one of the question is whether he can be convicted of DWI). I know Themis didn't spend that much time on no-fault insurance, but the rule, as I understand it, is that a P cannot sue a D who has no fault insurance UNLESS he suffers serious physical injury or damages in excess of $50,000. However, I thought the rule also said that you can sue someone who flat out doesn't have the insurance. The fact pattern said zero about whether or not the D was insured, and while I thought about it, I decided that wasn't the issue because there was no mention of it. Surprise, according to the model answer, D had no fault insurance but P sustained a serious physical injury and was thus entitled to sue.

Am I to just assume that drivers have no fault insurance in NY unless the fact pattern states otherwise? HALP!

charlieMF
Posts: 6
Joined: Sun Jul 19, 2015 4:51 pm

Re: Themis Bar Review Hangout - July 2015 Exam

Postby charlieMF » Fri Jul 24, 2015 5:23 pm

ThreeRivers wrote:In desperate need of some help.

I've been studying primarily with the lecture handouts. I had a folder saved "MBE" and a folder saved "PA". My PA folder somehow disappeared (I've spent way too long trying to recover it). Anyone taking PA and have the lecture handouts filled in / willing to send them to me?

Appreciate any help anyone can offer


Here you go: https://www.dropbox.com/sh/eik3fu7zmudc ... IpPXa?dl=0

There are going to be some pretty bad typos--I have like zero patience for doing anything whole heartedly during lectures.

Underoath
Posts: 235
Joined: Thu Jun 11, 2009 8:49 pm

Re: Themis Bar Review Hangout - July 2015 Exam

Postby Underoath » Fri Jul 24, 2015 5:25 pm

kateebee wrote:
Underoath wrote:
LOL HAHAHAHA I fuckin love this....because I have avoided essays this entire time as well.....what mixed set are you on? I'm barely on 12


I just finished Mixed Set 11. I am going to study Crim Law for a little bit, do that final specific MBE set. Tomorrow, review property and do that final MBE set. Then one Mixed MBE each day plus reviewing state specific and outlining some essays.

But after I typed that out, I laughed, because there's no way I will do that much. I am exhausted and completely out of motivation. Coasting in to these final days, and praying three years of law school, six weeks of intense study, above average writing skills, and a zen state of mind will get me a passing score.

Wishing you all the best! Very grateful for this outlet over the past few weeks.


<3 thank you!!! it is what it is now...wishing you the best as well

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

Re: Themis Bar Review Hangout - July 2015 Exam

Postby Confused7 » Fri Jul 24, 2015 5:29 pm

sd5289 wrote:As for me, question on one of the NY Torts essay PQ's:

[+] Spoiler
Torts fact pattern about a rear-end collision while P was sitting at a red light (hint: it's the one where the P is drunk, and one of the question is whether he can be convicted of DWI). I know Themis didn't spend that much time on no-fault insurance, but the rule, as I understand it, is that a P cannot sue a D who has no fault insurance UNLESS he suffers serious physical injury or damages in excess of $50,000. However, I thought the rule also said that you can sue someone who flat out doesn't have the insurance. The fact pattern said zero about whether or not the D was insured, and while I thought about it, I decided that wasn't the issue because there was no mention of it. Surprise, according to the model answer, D had no fault insurance but P sustained a serious physical injury and was thus entitled to sue.

Am I to just assume that drivers have no fault insurance in NY unless the fact pattern states otherwise? HALP!


Yeah, I think we should just assume that every automobile driver has no-fault insurance unless stated otherwise. Since NY requires all drivers to have the insurance.

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

Re: Themis Bar Review Hangout - July 2015 Exam

Postby Confused7 » Fri Jul 24, 2015 5:57 pm

Lol reviewing NY multiple choice questions now. Just saw one question where 65% of ppl selected a specific wrong answer (including yours truly), and only 19% of ppl selected the right answer. Good times.

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 24, 2015 6:21 pm

Confused7 wrote:Lol reviewing NY multiple choice questions now. Just saw one question where 65% of ppl selected a specific wrong answer (including yours truly), and only 19% of ppl selected the right answer. Good times.


There's actually a better one than that (though I got that one too and was part of the 65%):

Image

I chose D. The correct answer was C. :shock:

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

Re: Themis Bar Review Hangout - July 2015 Exam

Postby Confused7 » Fri Jul 24, 2015 6:26 pm

sd5289 wrote:
Confused7 wrote:Lol reviewing NY multiple choice questions now. Just saw one question where 65% of ppl selected a specific wrong answer (including yours truly), and only 19% of ppl selected the right answer. Good times.


There's actually a better one than that (though I got that one too and was part of the 65%):

Image

I chose D. The correct answer was C. :shock:


LOL. I'm impressed that you immediately knew which one I was talking about. I haven't come across the one you mentioned yet - but I will see what I got when I do and laugh.

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

Re: Themis Bar Review Hangout - July 2015 Exam

Postby Confused7 » Fri Jul 24, 2015 6:41 pm

Confused7 wrote:
sd5289 wrote:
Confused7 wrote:Lol reviewing NY multiple choice questions now. Just saw one question where 65% of ppl selected a specific wrong answer (including yours truly), and only 19% of ppl selected the right answer. Good times.


There's actually a better one than that (though I got that one too and was part of the 65%):

Image

I chose D. The correct answer was C. :shock:


LOL. I'm impressed that you immediately knew which one I was talking about. I haven't come across the one you mentioned yet - but I will see what I got when I do and laugh.


Okay, I just saw the one you mentioned. I also do NOT understand it. I thought that solicitation never merged in NY (even if necessarily incidental to the crime solicited)? There was even an essay question about this where the police officer dealt oregano and the model answer stated that it should not merge. When I asked Themis about it, they said that solicitation doesn't merge in NY.

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

Re: Themis Bar Review Hangout - July 2015 Exam

Postby Pickled » Fri Jul 24, 2015 6:54 pm

Can somebody please explain this question from the NCBE sample questions?

A brother and a sister purchased land under a deed that con-veyed title to them as joint tenants with right of survivorship. Common law joint tenancy is unmodified by statute in the jurisdiction.The purchase price was $50,000, of which the sister paid $10,000 and the brother paid $40,000. The sister later mort-gaged her interest in the land. The brother then died testate, leaving his entire estate to a cousin. The sister later paid off her mortgage debt, and the mortgage was released.At the present time, who owns the land?

(A)The answer depends on whether the jurisdiction follows the lien theory or the title theory of mortgages.
(B)Title is entirely in the sister as the surviving joint tenant.
(C)Title is in the sister and the cousin as equal tenants in common.
(D)Title is in the sister and the cousin as tenants in common, with the sister having a 20% interest and the cousin having an 80% interest.

(correct answer is A)

I am confused because the answer suggests this is a joint tenancy, but wouldn't both brother and sister need to have equal interest in the property for it to be a joint tenancy?

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

Re: Themis Bar Review Hangout - July 2015 Exam

Postby Pickled » Fri Jul 24, 2015 6:59 pm

Also this one please...

A woman from State A filed an action against a retailer in a state court in State B. The complaint alleged that the retailer had not delivered $100,000 worth of goods for which the woman had paid.Twenty days after being served, the retailer, which is incor-porated in State C and has its principal place of business in State B, filed a notice of removal in a federal district court in State B.Was the action properly removed?

(A)No, because the notice of removal was not timely filed.
(B)No, because the retailer is a citizen of State B.
(C)Yes, because the parties are citizens of different states and more than $75,000 is in controversy.
(D)Yes, because the retailer is a citizen of both State B and State C.

Answer is B

Everything I have seen up until now is that a corporation is a citizen of the state in which it is incorportated AND where it has its principal place of business???

In fact, this is word-for-word from a Themis answer explanation: "A corporation is a citizen of both its state of incorporation and the state in which it maintains its principal place of business."
Last edited by Pickled on Fri Jul 24, 2015 7:00 pm, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
Pleasye
Posts: 7970
Joined: Sun Mar 14, 2010 4:22 pm

Re: Themis Bar Review Hangout - July 2015 Exam

Postby Pleasye » Fri Jul 24, 2015 6:59 pm

Pickled wrote:Can somebody please explain this question from the NCBE sample questions?

A brother and a sister purchased land under a deed that con-veyed title to them as joint tenants with right of survivorship. Common law joint tenancy is unmodified by statute in the jurisdiction.The purchase price was $50,000, of which the sister paid $10,000 and the brother paid $40,000. The sister later mort-gaged her interest in the land. The brother then died testate, leaving his entire estate to a cousin. The sister later paid off her mortgage debt, and the mortgage was released.At the present time, who owns the land?

(A)The answer depends on whether the jurisdiction follows the lien theory or the title theory of mortgages.
(B)Title is entirely in the sister as the surviving joint tenant.
(C)Title is in the sister and the cousin as equal tenants in common.
(D)Title is in the sister and the cousin as tenants in common, with the sister having a 20% interest and the cousin having an 80% interest.

(correct answer is A)

I am confused because the answer suggests this is a joint tenancy, but wouldn't both brother and sister need to have equal interest in the property for it to be a joint tenancy?


They do have an equal interest in the property because they are joint tenants with rights of survivorship. They took title at the same time, in the same instrument (that included words of survivorship (as JTs with right of survivorship)), and thus presumably have the same interest and the same right to possession. You can presume this because the questions tell you they are JTWRS. That meets the four unities. I believe you're getting tripped up because they paid different amounts for the house and thus you think they have different interests in it, but that isn't what determines their interest in the house.

Since they're JTWRS the answer to this question depends on whether the jx folows lien or title theory because who owns what depends on whether the mortgage severed the JT.

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

Re: Themis Bar Review Hangout - July 2015 Exam

Postby Pickled » Fri Jul 24, 2015 7:02 pm

Pleasye wrote:
Pickled wrote:Can somebody please explain this question from the NCBE sample questions?

A brother and a sister purchased land under a deed that con-veyed title to them as joint tenants with right of survivorship. Common law joint tenancy is unmodified by statute in the jurisdiction.The purchase price was $50,000, of which the sister paid $10,000 and the brother paid $40,000. The sister later mort-gaged her interest in the land. The brother then died testate, leaving his entire estate to a cousin. The sister later paid off her mortgage debt, and the mortgage was released.At the present time, who owns the land?

(A)The answer depends on whether the jurisdiction follows the lien theory or the title theory of mortgages.
(B)Title is entirely in the sister as the surviving joint tenant.
(C)Title is in the sister and the cousin as equal tenants in common.
(D)Title is in the sister and the cousin as tenants in common, with the sister having a 20% interest and the cousin having an 80% interest.

(correct answer is A)

I am confused because the answer suggests this is a joint tenancy, but wouldn't both brother and sister need to have equal interest in the property for it to be a joint tenancy?


They do have an equal interest in the property because they are joint tenants with rights of survivorship. They took title at the same time, in the same instrument (that included words of survivorship (as JTs with right of survivorship)), and thus presumably have the same interest and the same right to possession. You can presume this because the questions tell you they are JTWRS. That meets the four unities. I believe you're getting tripped up because they paid different amounts for the house and thus you think they have different interests in it, but that isn't what determines their interest in the house.

Since they're JTWRS the answer to this question depends on whether the jx folows lien or title theory because who owns what depends on whether the mortgage severed the JT.


OK, so it never matters how much anybody pays. So long as they say we are JTWRS?




Return to “Bar Exam Prep and Discussion Forum”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 6 guests