BarBri Bar Review Hangout - July 2015 Exam

mr.hands
Posts: 892
Joined: Fri Jul 13, 2012 4:23 pm

Re: BarBri Bar Review Hangout - July 2015 Exam

Postby mr.hands » Sun Jul 05, 2015 6:55 pm

Good Guy Gaud wrote:This has probably been gone over numerous times but I'm too lazy to search:

What is the difference between these BarBri MBE questions and the real deal MBE questions?


MBE questions are shorter and usually only test on one issue. It's far more straightforward. I haven't read an answer and thought "wtf." Barbri throws in the kitchen sink and gets creative w answer choices

Follow up: do the Emmanuel MBE questions get progressively more difficult? I've only done the first 20 or so of a few sets...

Kage3212
Posts: 340
Joined: Thu Jul 28, 2011 12:34 am

Re: BarBri Bar Review Hangout - July 2015 Exam

Postby Kage3212 » Sun Jul 05, 2015 7:01 pm

mr.hands wrote:
Good Guy Gaud wrote:This has probably been gone over numerous times but I'm too lazy to search:

What is the difference between these BarBri MBE questions and the real deal MBE questions?


MBE questions are shorter and usually only test on one issue. It's far more straightforward. I haven't read an answer and thought "wtf." Barbri throws in the kitchen sink and gets creative w answer choices

Follow up: do the Emmanuel MBE questions get progressively more difficult? I've only done the first 20 or so of a few sets...


Nah, no real discernible difference throughout the set. Although a few tricky ones thrown in here and there.

mushybrain
Posts: 397
Joined: Sun May 08, 2011 2:08 pm

Re: BarBri Bar Review Hangout - July 2015 Exam

Postby mushybrain » Sun Jul 05, 2015 7:03 pm

mr.hands wrote:
Good Guy Gaud wrote:Follow up: do the Emmanuel MBE questions get progressively more difficult? I've only done the first 20 or so of a few sets...

Not that I've noticed.

Neff
Posts: 211
Joined: Fri Dec 07, 2012 1:29 am

Re: BarBri Bar Review Hangout - July 2015 Exam

Postby Neff » Sun Jul 05, 2015 7:13 pm

Yeah after doing real Emanuel's questions I've almost become complacent having realized how easy they are. They very rarely test any of the more obscure rules (think Barbri AMP stuff), and the answer choices often telegraph the right pick because some of them are so obviously wrong. Anyone getting around 50% on Barbri should be fine on the real thing.

Also, not only are Emanuel's explanations great, the introduction to each subject has some terrific subject-specific advice that you wouldn't find in Barbri. Highly recommended.

User avatar
Good Guy Gaud
Posts: 5433
Joined: Thu Jul 02, 2015 11:41 pm

Re: BarBri Bar Review Hangout - July 2015 Exam

Postby Good Guy Gaud » Sun Jul 05, 2015 7:19 pm

Huge boost of confidence after reading that. thanks

Kage3212
Posts: 340
Joined: Thu Jul 28, 2011 12:34 am

Re: BarBri Bar Review Hangout - July 2015 Exam

Postby Kage3212 » Sun Jul 05, 2015 7:30 pm

Neff wrote:Yeah after doing real Emanuel's questions I've almost become complacent having realized how easy they are. They very rarely test any of the more obscure rules (think Barbri AMP stuff), and the answer choices often telegraph the right pick because some of them are so obviously wrong. Anyone getting around 50% on Barbri should be fine on the real thing.

Also, not only are Emanuel's explanations great, the introduction to each subject has some terrific subject-specific advice that you wouldn't find in Barbri. Highly recommended.


Second this. Con law in particular. I dont know Con Law for shit, just reading that introductory material allows you to easily separate right wrong wrong, and has gotten my percentage in that area up into the 80s (even on non-Emmanuel Questions). Essays....well that's a diff subject. Regardless, read that Con Law material. It is worth its weight in gold.

User avatar
Unagi
Posts: 423
Joined: Mon Oct 24, 2011 9:55 am

Re: BarBri Bar Review Hangout - July 2015 Exam

Postby Unagi » Sun Jul 05, 2015 9:39 pm

I'm trying to take the MPQ Mixed Subject Set 1, but can't find that in any of our books... :evil:
Do we have to use the online pdf or is there another way?

User avatar
Good Guy Gaud
Posts: 5433
Joined: Thu Jul 02, 2015 11:41 pm

Re: BarBri Bar Review Hangout - July 2015 Exam

Postby Good Guy Gaud » Sun Jul 05, 2015 9:46 pm

Print it?

User avatar
Unagi
Posts: 423
Joined: Mon Oct 24, 2011 9:55 am

Re: BarBri Bar Review Hangout - July 2015 Exam

Postby Unagi » Sun Jul 05, 2015 9:52 pm

I had to move and don't have a printer at home...
I was hoping it would be in the books somewhere, but I'll just use the pdf then.
Thanks! :wink:

User avatar
LawGuy321
Posts: 103
Joined: Wed Jan 04, 2012 9:02 am

Re: BarBri Bar Review Hangout - July 2015 Exam

Postby LawGuy321 » Sun Jul 05, 2015 9:56 pm

Can anyone explain when we use Strict Liability for products liability, and when we use negligence? The questions don't seem to specify, and we're supposed to know which they're suing under. I've obviously missed something.

I DO know that whenever there's been a "change in condition" of the product, the manufacturer can't be held strictly liable. But that cannot be everything...

cc999
Posts: 8
Joined: Thu Dec 15, 2011 5:11 pm

Re: BarBri Bar Review Hangout - July 2015 Exam

Postby cc999 » Sun Jul 05, 2015 10:01 pm

Are you all actually writing out essays? I've gotten into the habit of issue spotting and moving on.... bad?

User avatar
Good Guy Gaud
Posts: 5433
Joined: Thu Jul 02, 2015 11:41 pm

Re: BarBri Bar Review Hangout - July 2015 Exam

Postby Good Guy Gaud » Sun Jul 05, 2015 10:12 pm

cc999 wrote:Are you all actually writing out essays? I've gotten into the habit of issue spotting and moving on.... bad?



Same ...

User avatar
Redamon1
Posts: 460
Joined: Wed Jul 14, 2010 2:46 pm

Re: BarBri Bar Review Hangout - July 2015 Exam

Postby Redamon1 » Sun Jul 05, 2015 10:13 pm

LawGuy321 wrote:Can anyone explain when we use Strict Liability for products liability, and when we use negligence? The questions don't seem to specify, and we're supposed to know which they're suing under. I've obviously missed something.

I DO know that whenever there's been a "change in condition" of the product, the manufacturer can't be held strictly liable. But that cannot be everything...


From what I understand, P is always free to sue under either theory. Sometimes the prompt of the MBE question will specify whether you should apply SL or negligence. If the prompt doesn't say and simply asks whether P will win the suit, then you need to determine whether P can recover under either theory based on the facts in the question.

Kage3212
Posts: 340
Joined: Thu Jul 28, 2011 12:34 am

Re: BarBri Bar Review Hangout - July 2015 Exam

Postby Kage3212 » Sun Jul 05, 2015 10:24 pm

Redamon1 wrote:
LawGuy321 wrote:Can anyone explain when we use Strict Liability for products liability, and when we use negligence? The questions don't seem to specify, and we're supposed to know which they're suing under. I've obviously missed something.

I DO know that whenever there's been a "change in condition" of the product, the manufacturer can't be held strictly liable. But that cannot be everything...


From what I understand, P is always free to sue under either theory. Sometimes the prompt of the MBE question will specify whether you should apply SL or negligence. If the prompt doesn't say and simply asks whether P will win the suit, then you need to determine whether P can recover under either theory based on the facts in the question.


Also helpful (maybe) is the fact that strict liability is isolated to three circumstances: 1) keeping a wild animal; 2) abnormally dangerous activity; and 3) selling a defective product (products liability). Anything outside those realms cannot be SL. You really have to go through elements then to figure it out, ie, if the seller is just a casual seller he is outside the scope of SL, thus you proceed to see if he was negligent in selling that product (I think).

ash0117
Posts: 246
Joined: Tue Jun 28, 2011 10:10 pm

Re: BarBri Bar Review Hangout - July 2015 Exam

Postby ash0117 » Sun Jul 05, 2015 10:25 pm

cc999 wrote:Are you all actually writing out essays? I've gotten into the habit of issue spotting and moving on.... bad?


I think once you've written a few essays, you've written them all. I've just been issue spotting and making sure I can recite the rules. Sometimes I say the explanations out loud to flush out my thinking. But worrying about typing/ writing out the essay is a waste, at least for me. I've only been fully writing out the graded ones.

User avatar
BVest
Posts: 5704
Joined: Tue Mar 20, 2012 1:51 pm

Re: BarBri Bar Review Hangout - July 2015 Exam

Postby BVest » Sun Jul 05, 2015 10:26 pm

LawGuy321 wrote:Can anyone explain when we use Strict Liability for products liability, and when we use negligence? The questions don't seem to specify, and we're supposed to know which they're suing under. I've obviously missed something.

I DO know that whenever there's been a "change in condition" of the product, the manufacturer can't be held strictly liable. But that cannot be everything...


All the questions I've seen so far have said when negligence was used.

AReasonableMan
Posts: 1504
Joined: Sun Sep 21, 2014 9:32 pm

Re: BarBri Bar Review Hangout - July 2015 Exam

Postby AReasonableMan » Sun Jul 05, 2015 10:27 pm

LawGuy321 wrote:Can anyone explain when we use Strict Liability for products liability, and when we use negligence? The questions don't seem to specify, and we're supposed to know which they're suing under. I've obviously missed something.

I DO know that whenever there's been a "change in condition" of the product, the manufacturer can't be held strictly liable. But that cannot be everything...

Whenever there's something wrong with the product you want to be thinking about strict liability - if it is a screw up on the assemblyline, built in a stupid way or doesn't adequately warn, you may be able to argue for SL if the product has been unaltered and was used in a foreseeable way.

For example, the Barbri 50 q practice set had something with a guy mounting his TV to the ceiling that then smashed the face of his 1 night stand when it fell on her. You normally wouldn't think this is strict liability because what idiot mounts a TV to the ceiling? However, one choice said "SL if the company had reason to know people mount TV's to the ceiling." If this was the case then the company had specific notice their clientele are dumb dumbs, and should have had a warning.

I think generally you want to argue both. "You're strictly liable because of a b c and even if you're not, you're negligent because of yada". There are exceptions to this and I'm only getting 29/50 on practice sets so am no expert, but whenever a person is hurt because of a product you should be asking whether SL may exist subject of course to the many exceptions. I don't mention wild animals or mines because it's pretty obvious if you walk through town square in your own world rocking out to your i-pod, step on a mine and explode that the idiot who put the mine there should lose.

Also, got 29/50 - not a very good score. Just went into high gear a week ago and have only been able to review lecture notes from 2/7 big topics. Reasonable to improve to 35/50 while still learning the state law stuff from scratch?

Barbro
Posts: 30
Joined: Sun Jul 05, 2015 10:26 pm

Re: BarBri Bar Review Hangout - July 2015 Exam

Postby Barbro » Sun Jul 05, 2015 11:15 pm

My PSP shows that NY average completion is 37%, is that real life or are people just not checking off what they do? Are you guys on pace with Barbri or behind?
Last edited by Barbro on Sun Jul 05, 2015 11:32 pm, edited 1 time in total.

AReasonableMan
Posts: 1504
Joined: Sun Sep 21, 2014 9:32 pm

Re: BarBri Bar Review Hangout - July 2015 Exam

Postby AReasonableMan » Sun Jul 05, 2015 11:17 pm

Barbro wrote:My PSP shows that NY average completion is 37%, is that real life or are people just not checking off what they do?

Do people cheat on these quesiton sets? The percentiles creep me out.

User avatar
Good Guy Gaud
Posts: 5433
Joined: Thu Jul 02, 2015 11:41 pm

Re: BarBri Bar Review Hangout - July 2015 Exam

Postby Good Guy Gaud » Mon Jul 06, 2015 12:20 am

Looking at these essay score sheets :

Let's say you've got no clue what's going on during the exam and you gotta wing it. From the looks of it I can get solid points just literally repeating the facts from the question...

Solid strategy, yea?

jamescastle
Posts: 257
Joined: Wed Jun 10, 2015 12:58 am

Re: BarBri Bar Review Hangout - July 2015 Exam

Postby jamescastle » Mon Jul 06, 2015 12:33 am

AReasonableMan wrote:
Barbro wrote:My PSP shows that NY average completion is 37%, is that real life or are people just not checking off what they do?

Do people cheat on these quesiton sets? The percentiles creep me out.

I've done a lot of questions on the app and if I get a question that I've done before and I get it right the second time it moves it to the "correct" spot.
So instead of looking at my overall % right it looks at how many of the questions I have given the correct answer to at least once. So theoretically it is possible to do all ~200 questions in torts, say, enough times such that you answer every one correctly. Then you'd show up as having 100% right but that's nowhere near right.
So I think that inflates some of the percentiles.

User avatar
LawGuy321
Posts: 103
Joined: Wed Jan 04, 2012 9:02 am

Re: BarBri Bar Review Hangout - July 2015 Exam

Postby LawGuy321 » Mon Jul 06, 2015 12:38 am

AReasonableMan wrote:
LawGuy321 wrote:Can anyone explain when we use Strict Liability for products liability, and when we use negligence? The questions don't seem to specify, and we're supposed to know which they're suing under. I've obviously missed something.

I DO know that whenever there's been a "change in condition" of the product, the manufacturer can't be held strictly liable. But that cannot be everything...

Whenever there's something wrong with the product you want to be thinking about strict liability - if it is a screw up on the assemblyline, built in a stupid way or doesn't adequately warn, you may be able to argue for SL if the product has been unaltered and was used in a foreseeable way.

For example, the Barbri 50 q practice set had something with a guy mounting his TV to the ceiling that then smashed the face of his 1 night stand when it fell on her. You normally wouldn't think this is strict liability because what idiot mounts a TV to the ceiling? However, one choice said "SL if the company had reason to know people mount TV's to the ceiling." If this was the case then the company had specific notice their clientele are dumb dumbs, and should have had a warning.

I think generally you want to argue both. "You're strictly liable because of a b c and even if you're not, you're negligent because of yada". There are exceptions to this and I'm only getting 29/50 on practice sets so am no expert, but whenever a person is hurt because of a product you should be asking whether SL may exist subject of course to the many exceptions. I don't mention wild animals or mines because it's pretty obvious if you walk through town square in your own world rocking out to your i-pod, step on a mine and explode that the idiot who put the mine there should lose.

Also, got 29/50 - not a very good score. Just went into high gear a week ago and have only been able to review lecture notes from 2/7 big topics. Reasonable to improve to 35/50 while still learning the state law stuff from scratch?


Thanks, guys. Here's what was tripping me out -- I was thinking of "negligence products liability" as if it were some different type of negligence. What I now gather is that SL applies if the 4 factors are there: (1) merchant, (2) defective, (3) No changed circumstances (4) Foreseeable use. But if those don't apply it's just regular negligence analysis -- nothing special just because it's a products case. So all 5 negligence steps must be met.

Sound right? Thanks everyone

EAsports
Posts: 30
Joined: Tue Aug 09, 2011 12:24 pm

Re: BarBri Bar Review Hangout - July 2015 Exam

Postby EAsports » Mon Jul 06, 2015 1:19 am

Anyone feel like the Mixed Practice Sets available online are generally much easier than the questions in the MPQ (aside from the MBE Diagnostic)?

User avatar
Tiago Splitter
Posts: 15511
Joined: Tue Jun 28, 2011 1:20 am

Re: BarBri Bar Review Hangout - July 2015 Exam

Postby Tiago Splitter » Mon Jul 06, 2015 1:27 am

EAsports wrote:Anyone feel like the Mixed Practice Sets available online are generally much easier than the questions in the MPQ (aside from the MBE Diagnostic)?

I think most of us are scoring higher on the mixed sets, but the consensus seems to be that it's because the mixed sets are more like the real thing in that they don't test the most minute details of the law the same way the MPQs do.

User avatar
Tiago Splitter
Posts: 15511
Joined: Tue Jun 28, 2011 1:20 am

Re: BarBri Bar Review Hangout - July 2015 Exam

Postby Tiago Splitter » Mon Jul 06, 2015 1:30 am

LawGuy321 wrote:Thanks, guys. Here's what was tripping me out -- I was thinking of "negligence products liability" as if it were some different type of negligence. What I now gather is that SL applies if the 4 factors are there: (1) merchant, (2) defective, (3) No changed circumstances (4) Foreseeable use. But if those don't apply it's just regular negligence analysis -- nothing special just because it's a products case. So all 5 negligence steps must be met.

Sound right? Thanks everyone

Like redamon said it should show up in the question (if multiple choice). They'll try to trip you up by using a products liability question with a negligence claim. When that happens it's all about reasonableness and you can forget the four factors you listed above.

As others have said if it's an essay question and they don't make clear whether it's negligence or SL analyze using both.




Return to “Bar Exam Prep and Discussion Forum”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 4 guests