Themis Bar Review Hangout - July 2015 Exam

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

Re: Themis Bar Review Hangout - July 2015 Exam

Postby MrBriggs360 » Fri Jun 19, 2015 11:34 am

GULCPerson wrote:
MrBriggs360 wrote:Does anyone have confirmation that your overall percentage completed drops when new tasks become available? If that is true I am NEVER going to be able to finish this course. I hope it is untrue, because I have been deliberately pacing myself to do a specific amount each week to finish on time. :(


What makes you think the overall % works this way? I have no idea if it does or doesn't, I guess, but it would be insanely counterintuitive to have an "overall progress" number that doesn't account for a significant number of delayed-release assignments (or frankly, that could ever decrease, for any reason).


There were a bunch of people in the July 2014 thread saying they were losing percentage points when certain things opened up, and that also they stopped getting percentage credit for Review assignments and other things later in the process. I'm not sure how it works, and I don't think anyone really is. For instance, last year on the 4th of July they were "gifted" 1% for completing the "take the day off for the 4th!" assignment, but then the next couple days nothing they did added to their overall percentage or daily percentage.

Perhaps these issues have been fixed? No idea.

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

Re: Themis Bar Review Hangout - July 2015 Exam

Postby zor » Fri Jun 19, 2015 12:11 pm

MrBriggs360 wrote:
kgus22 wrote:
MrBriggs360 wrote:Just a quick warning to New Yorkers, even though I think this may have already been mentioned. I decided to go through the NY Family Law handout and large outline to compile an "elements spreadsheet" for me to run through and try to memorize and I now realized that Mangold has misstated the elements for a TON of stuff. It seems that she just sort of puts the elements in her own words.

EDIT: Just a quick example to illustrate my point:

In her handout, she says constructive abandonment as a grounds for divorce is where "one spouse forces the other spouse out of the house and that 1. must be willful, continued and unjustified, 2. must include refusal to engage in sexual relations, 3. must last at least one year."

In actuality, she conflated two potential grounds for constructive abandonment. One type of constructive abandonment involves one party forcing the other out of the house. The other type of constructive abandonment is refusal to engage in sexual relations for a period of one year or more. They are two totally different grounds that she conflated. Stuff like this could REALLY screw someone up in an essay.

References.. page 8 of her handout, page 12 of the large outline.


I noticed this!! One weekend I somehow has like 3 family law essays and I noticed her elements were not fully correct and started to get really confused.


I've been compiling a spreadsheet of the elements proper, but it's in terms that ring a bell to me, so it may not be helpful. If you find it helpful, though, I would be happy to send it along when I'm finished or to provide to anyone here, for that matter. This is what it looks like..

http://imgur.com/SRhAAed


This is fantastic. Please post. Especially considering the Family Law lecture elements issues.

User avatar
Mad Hatter
Posts: 655
Joined: Sat Apr 28, 2012 10:38 pm

Re: Themis Bar Review Hangout - July 2015 Exam

Postby Mad Hatter » Fri Jun 19, 2015 12:54 pm

I hate when they'll present a question that really doesn't have a clear right answer based on the principles presented in the outline/lecture, and then the answer explanation will begin with "The Supreme Court has found ___" and not really offer much else. If we aren't expected to memorize every last Supreme Court case, it seems kind of disingenuous to ask really difficult questions* modeled after them.

Not sure if this is a complaint against Themis or the NCBEX (who writes the questions), but whatever.

*So difficult, in fact, that the Supreme Court justices themselves can't agree on the damn answer.

User avatar
MrMustache
Posts: 221
Joined: Tue Jun 02, 2015 3:41 pm

Re: Themis Bar Review Hangout - July 2015 Exam

Postby MrMustache » Fri Jun 19, 2015 12:58 pm

The Themis method doesn't seem to be working for me. I think I'll be joining the "ignore essays till July" crowd and do nothing but long outlines and MBEs till then.

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

Re: Themis Bar Review Hangout - July 2015 Exam

Postby Confused7 » Fri Jun 19, 2015 1:04 pm

Just did the crim pro/evidence graded essay for today....ugh definitely not looking foward to getting my score back.

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

Re: Themis Bar Review Hangout - July 2015 Exam

Postby sd5289 » Fri Jun 19, 2015 1:14 pm

I'm just going to ignore the MBE workshop "tips" from now on because they are bullshit. The Best Evidence Rule has been the correct answer every. single. time. it has come up.

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

Re: Themis Bar Review Hangout - July 2015 Exam

Postby sd5289 » Fri Jun 19, 2015 1:16 pm

And what do you know, next question it comes up again, I choose the best evidence rule answer and presto, it's correct. :roll:

User avatar
MrMustache
Posts: 221
Joined: Tue Jun 02, 2015 3:41 pm

Re: Themis Bar Review Hangout - July 2015 Exam

Postby MrMustache » Fri Jun 19, 2015 1:16 pm

sd5289 wrote:I'm just going to ignore the MBE workshop "tips" from now on because they are bullshit. The Best Evidence Rule has been the correct answer every. single. time. it has come up.


I think I've encountered only one question where it wasn't the correct answer.

kgus22
Posts: 51
Joined: Sun Feb 26, 2012 5:13 pm

Re: Themis Bar Review Hangout - July 2015 Exam

Postby kgus22 » Fri Jun 19, 2015 1:25 pm

MrMustache wrote:
sd5289 wrote:I'm just going to ignore the MBE workshop "tips" from now on because they are bullshit. The Best Evidence Rule has been the correct answer every. single. time. it has come up.


I think I've encountered only one question where it wasn't the correct answer.


I've had it be the incorrect answer twice!

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

Re: Themis Bar Review Hangout - July 2015 Exam

Postby MrBriggs360 » Fri Jun 19, 2015 1:27 pm

I'm in agreement that the MBE workshop tips have been entirely worthless, and I don't even consider them when selecting an answer choice. They've distracted me more than not. The ONLY thing she turned my eyes to that helped me was the crucial fact that you need to memorize exactly what RAP applies to, which is a pretty basic thing.

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

Re: Themis Bar Review Hangout - July 2015 Exam

Postby sd5289 » Fri Jun 19, 2015 1:29 pm

kgus22 wrote:
MrMustache wrote:
sd5289 wrote:I'm just going to ignore the MBE workshop "tips" from now on because they are bullshit. The Best Evidence Rule has been the correct answer every. single. time. it has come up.


I think I've encountered only one question where it wasn't the correct answer.


I've had it be the incorrect answer twice!


I finally just came across one where it was incorrect. The answer explanation hopefully has cleared this nonsense up for me. My understanding is: the BER applies when the witness is testifying about what's in the document, video, photograph, etc., NOT about something they have personal knowledge of that also happens to be encapsulated in the document, video, photograph, etc.

I think I get it...

gr8scOtt!
Posts: 213
Joined: Wed Aug 28, 2013 5:07 pm

Re: Themis Bar Review Hangout - July 2015 Exam

Postby gr8scOtt! » Fri Jun 19, 2015 1:43 pm

^It took me like seven or eight MBE questions to realize that "unavailable declarant" was not a hearsay exception all on it's on and that it needs to be former testimony, dying declaration, etc. For some reason that was not clear to me from the lecture and the outlines.

A question would be like "this witness died, is his statement admissible?" and I'd think, well he's dead, so he's unavailable, so yes! And the answer would say "nope, doesn't fall under an unavailable declarant exception." And I'd just be like... but... he's dead? I don't understand...


I hate evidence. :evil:

jlaw14
Posts: 5
Joined: Wed May 20, 2015 1:38 pm

Re: Themis Bar Review Hangout - July 2015 Exam

Postby jlaw14 » Fri Jun 19, 2015 1:46 pm

Anyone get confused by the NY Essay workshop for criminal law and procedure? She was talking about the elements of the due process right to a fair trial and I couldn't verify where in our handout/outline the information was coming from.
For example, a key part of the sample essay was that the jury can only review evidence that was part of the trial. Did I miss something or was this my first time hearing this in the Themis material?
I had a similar experience with the Family Law essay writing workshop.

User avatar
MrMustache
Posts: 221
Joined: Tue Jun 02, 2015 3:41 pm

Re: Themis Bar Review Hangout - July 2015 Exam

Postby MrMustache » Fri Jun 19, 2015 1:54 pm

I'm confused about Refreshed Recollection rule.

1) Present recollection- item used to refresh witness's present recollection is not admissible into evidence, unless offered by defense.

2) Past recollection recorded- item may be admitted into evidence, but only defense can offer the item as an exhibit.


Is this correct? And if so, am I missing any other exceptions?

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

Re: Themis Bar Review Hangout - July 2015 Exam

Postby Pleasye » Fri Jun 19, 2015 1:57 pm

MrMustache wrote:I'm confused about Refreshed Recollection rule.

1) Present recollection- item used to refresh witness's present recollection is not admissible into evidence, unless offered by defense.

2) Past recollection recorded- item may be admitted into evidence, but only defense can offer the item as an exhibit.


Is this correct? And if so, am I missing any other exceptions?

Present recollection refreshed and past recollection recorded are separate rules. I would try to keep them separate in your mind.

User avatar
Tripl3Espresso
Posts: 47
Joined: Sun May 31, 2015 6:58 pm

Re: Themis Bar Review Hangout - July 2015 Exam

Postby Tripl3Espresso » Fri Jun 19, 2015 2:11 pm

gr8scOtt! wrote:^It took me like seven or eight MBE questions to realize that "unavailable declarant" was not a hearsay exception all on it's on and that it needs to be former testimony, dying declaration, etc. For some reason that was not clear to me from the lecture and the outlines.

A question would be like "this witness died, is his statement admissible?" and I'd think, well he's dead, so he's unavailable, so yes! And the answer would say "nope, doesn't fall under an unavailable declarant exception." And I'd just be like... but... he's dead? I don't understand...


I hate evidence. :evil:


You're not alone. Evidence has been my worst subject by far.

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

Re: Themis Bar Review Hangout - July 2015 Exam

Postby sd5289 » Fri Jun 19, 2015 2:17 pm

jlaw14 wrote:Anyone get confused by the NY Essay workshop for criminal law and procedure? She was talking about the elements of the due process right to a fair trial and I couldn't verify where in our handout/outline the information was coming from.
For example, a key part of the sample essay was that the jury can only review evidence that was part of the trial. Did I miss something or was this my first time hearing this in the Themis material?
I had a similar experience with the Family Law essay writing workshop.


I knew that fact, but only because I work in Crim and knew that already. It definitely did not come up in the Themis material in any substantive manner, so don't worry, it's not you.

User avatar
sdphill
Posts: 490
Joined: Thu May 06, 2010 4:26 am

Re: Themis Bar Review Hangout - July 2015 Exam

Postby sdphill » Fri Jun 19, 2015 2:22 pm

Tripl3Espresso wrote:
gr8scOtt! wrote:^It took me like seven or eight MBE questions to realize that "unavailable declarant" was not a hearsay exception all on it's on and that it needs to be former testimony, dying declaration, etc. For some reason that was not clear to me from the lecture and the outlines.

A question would be like "this witness died, is his statement admissible?" and I'd think, well he's dead, so he's unavailable, so yes! And the answer would say "nope, doesn't fall under an unavailable declarant exception." And I'd just be like... but... he's dead? I don't understand...


I hate evidence. :evil:


You're not alone. Evidence has been my worst subject by far.


Ditto... And I'm personally tired of his review sessions at the end of every video... (Does everyone else have this? It seems like my lecture for Evidence is catered to the State's Bar I'm taking because he is bring up the distinctions within the actual MBE video.)

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

Re: Themis Bar Review Hangout - July 2015 Exam

Postby zor » Fri Jun 19, 2015 3:03 pm

MrBriggs360 wrote:I'm in agreement that the MBE workshop tips have been entirely worthless, and I don't even consider them when selecting an answer choice. They've distracted me more than not. The ONLY thing she turned my eyes to that helped me was the crucial fact that you need to memorize exactly what RAP applies to, which is a pretty basic thing.


I did find one tip for the workshop really helpful: in Crim, always negate an element of the crime before you see a defense. So there have been a ton of questions in which BOTH the element is missing AND there's a defense, and it's been right that choosing the element is always the right answer.

But... that's basically it.

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

Re: Themis Bar Review Hangout - July 2015 Exam

Postby always_raining » Fri Jun 19, 2015 3:04 pm

Can someone explain how this criminal procedure essay question explanation/answer is correct:

[+] Spoiler
Crim Pro essay: Student gets questioned by police about a robbery. Answer states that there has been a seizure: "A seizure occurs when a reasonable person would believe that he was not free to leave. In this case, Student was taken into his manager’s office for 25 minutes with two officers, one of whom had a visible weapon. The door was closed, and one officer sat between the Student and the door. Student was not told that he was free to leave. Under these circumstances, a reasonable person in Student’s position would probably have believed that he was not free to leave until given permission by the police officers."

Then, the question is whether Student should have been read Miranda before questioning. Answer concludes Student is not in "custody" despite having been arrested/seized in previous paragraph.Answer explains:

"Assuming there was an interrogation, the next issue is whether Student was in custody. A person is in custody when he is not free to leave or is otherwise deprived of his freedom in any significant way. In this case, Student was questioned in the manager’s office. Student was outnumbered two to one, and one officer with a visible firearm sat between Student and the door. Although police did not tell Student that he was free to leave, Student was probably not in custody. The police officers did not tell Student that he was under arrest until the end of the interview. During the interview, Student was not under any restraints. While Student may not have felt that he was free to leave, a reasonable person would not have believed that he had been arrested or otherwise taken into formal custody. Thus, Student was not in custody, and there should be no suppression for a Miranda violation"

WHAT?? Helppppp.

User avatar
MrMustache
Posts: 221
Joined: Tue Jun 02, 2015 3:41 pm

Re: Themis Bar Review Hangout - July 2015 Exam

Postby MrMustache » Fri Jun 19, 2015 3:54 pm

I'm having a hard time distinguishing when something is a confidential marital communication.

Is something said between husband and wife automatically confidential?

[+] Spoiler
The wife testified that while they were in bed, the defendant stated, “I’ve had enough of the way my employer treats me. Something has to be done.

It doesn't say he said it to his wife, he could have been talking to himself. He didn't say anything like "don't tell anyone, but..." He just said it, his wife heard it, and it is confidential.

User avatar
Nelson
Posts: 2061
Joined: Thu Feb 03, 2011 12:43 am

Re: Themis Bar Review Hangout - July 2015 Exam

Postby Nelson » Fri Jun 19, 2015 3:56 pm

MrMustache wrote:I'm having a hard time distinguishing when something is a confidential marital communication.

Is something said between husband and wife automatically confidential?

[+] Spoiler
The wife testified that while they were in bed, the defendant stated, “I’ve had enough of the way my employer treats me. Something has to be done.

It doesn't say he said it to his wife, he could have been talking to himself. He didn't say anything like "don't tell anyone, but..." He just said it, his wife heard it, and it is confidential.

It's presumed confidential if it's just the husband and wife present during the conversation. You only need to worry about whether it's confidential if a third party is present. Then consider whether or not they should reasonably have been aware of the third party (e.g. an eavesdropper won't generally destroy confidentiality unless the parties are aware of their presence).

User avatar
MrMustache
Posts: 221
Joined: Tue Jun 02, 2015 3:41 pm

Re: Themis Bar Review Hangout - July 2015 Exam

Postby MrMustache » Fri Jun 19, 2015 4:19 pm

Nelson wrote:
MrMustache wrote:I'm having a hard time distinguishing when something is a confidential marital communication.

Is something said between husband and wife automatically confidential?

[+] Spoiler
The wife testified that while they were in bed, the defendant stated, “I’ve had enough of the way my employer treats me. Something has to be done.

It doesn't say he said it to his wife, he could have been talking to himself. He didn't say anything like "don't tell anyone, but..." He just said it, his wife heard it, and it is confidential.

It's presumed confidential if it's just the husband and wife present during the conversation. You only need to worry about whether it's confidential if a third party is present. Then consider whether or not they should reasonably have been aware of the third party (e.g. an eavesdropper won't generally destroy confidentiality unless the parties are aware of their presence).


Thanks!

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

Re: Themis Bar Review Hangout - July 2015 Exam

Postby annapach » Fri Jun 19, 2015 4:27 pm

So: random question re Milestone exam 1 from a little while back. I've been doing decently on torts, consistently over 70%, until the milestone exam. I only got 5/14 right. I don't even know how to begin to address this. Bad luck? Did anyone else have that experience with torts on the milestone exam?

HND
Posts: 9
Joined: Tue Jun 02, 2015 7:37 pm

Re: Themis Bar Review Hangout - July 2015 Exam

Postby HND » Fri Jun 19, 2015 5:19 pm

So I got a message saying I should be at 50% this weekend...the HALF WAY MARK! ...


lmfao yeah right. Let me just give up on life and jump off a bridge.




Return to “Bar Exam Prep and Discussion Forum”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest