BarBri Bar Review Hangout - July 2015 Exam Forum

[scaliaantics]

I'm like 6 essays behind. I just don't feel comfortable writing the essays without a chance to review the material first... and I don't feel like I have a chance to review anything because there is just so much stuff.

[3|ink]

I'm like 6 essays behind. I just don't feel comfortable writing the essays without a chance to review the material first... and I don't feel like I have a chance to review anything because there is just so much stuff.

I know, right? I haven't written ANY essays yet because of this. I don't see the point.

[BuckinghamB]

I'm like 6 essays behind. I just don't feel comfortable writing the essays without a chance to review the material first... and I don't feel like I have a chance to review anything because there is just so much stuff.

I know, right? I haven't written ANY essays yet because of this. I don't see the point.

+1

[3|ink]

I'll add:

a) I understand the importance of writing out practice essays, and
b) I get that we'll ultimately have to write essays on topics we barely know, but

It seems like a waste of precious study time to attempt to write out an essay when you are not at all comfortable with your grasp of the subject matter.

[mr.hands]

I'll add:

a) I understand the importance of writing out practice essays, and
b) I get that we'll ultimately have to write essays on topics we barely know, but

It seems like a waste of precious study time to attempt to write out an essay when you are not at all comfortable with your grasp of the subject matter.

Agreed, especially because we have so few practice essays. In my state the MBE i worth WAY less than half the exam, so the essays are invaluable

[Danger Zone]

Haven't written one either

[mushybrain]

Glad you all said that. I'm in the same place. I did the first couple and then realized it was a waste of time and a perfectly good essay prompt. I'd rather use them a bit closer to the exam, even if just to outline. I feel like I learn much less going over an essay I didn't know much about than I do in that same amount of time spent actively learning material.

I definitely want to practice them and I plan to, but so far the grading appears to boil down to "know everything, write it all starting with the absolute basics." It'd be more useful to practice making up rules/balancing tests in case I get stuck on the real exam, but that's not a good use of time right now either.

[rinkrat19]

I wrote 2 Conlaw essays and got terrible and slightly less terrible scores, but attempted a Property one and literally only had 300 words to say before I ran out of related things I understand. I think I may have to just give Property up as a total loss on the entire exam.

[old_soul]

On a slightly unrelated note, these Property MCQs are killing me. I'm taking roughly around 3 mins for most of these Prop qs. The fact patterns are so long and some have to be diagrammed to really grasp it all.

End rant.

[Kage3212]

On a slightly unrelated note, these Property MCQs are killing me. I'm taking roughly around 3 mins for most of these Prop qs. The fact patterns are so long and some have to be diagrammed to really grasp it all.

End rant.

Yeah, some property/contracts are brutal. But you begin to see how you can make up ground on other questions. For example, some conlaw questions asking what clause is best used to attack the issue at hand. That question is a 30 second question and answer.

[charlesxavier]

Writing the essays at this point makes me uncomfortable. I felt like the property/contracts/torts/crim law essays weren't too bad because spotting the issues was relatively easy. It was just tough remembering the precise rules. I looked over a con law essay today it it was rough. The question was so broad that I didn't even know where to begin. It's pretty different than the Con Law multiple choice questions which can be pretty easy because typically two answers are clearly wrong.

[Charger]

On a slightly unrelated note, these Property MCQs are killing me. I'm taking roughly around 3 mins for most of these Prop qs. The fact patterns are so long and some have to be diagrammed to really grasp it all.

End rant.

This. And I hate it when after 3 minutes it asks if I'm still studying or whatever. Like, fucking yes, I'm just slow, okay?

[jas31]

In my humble opinion, it makes sense to do the essays even if you're not sharp on the law tested. There's no possible way you can remember anything, so if you come across a question on game day that completely stumps you, you have practice making up a rule and applying it.

[murray18]

Has anyone abandoned their PSP?

I've been trying my best to follow it because it does a decent job of keeping me focused on a timeline (i.e. I am tempted to move on past subjects that I feel really comfortable with, while I also feel myself bogging down in harder subjects). That being said, some of this shit is pretty redundant/too time consuming. I've been putting off the essays and extra MPTs unless I just have free time to gander at them (pro tip: I don't have time to look at them).

edit: I'm also not touching the AMP homework anymore.

[goaheadualright]

Hey! Studying for NY

When were the BarBri lectures that are available online (not the live lecture or live-stream lecture you can attend) filmed? Are they replaced with the 2015 stream the day after or do they remain older the whole summer?

[kykiske]

My approach to the MEE essays likens to how I prepared for my law school exams.

Here's my general strategy:

1. Read the question once.
2. Read the model answer once.
3. Write out my own response to the question without looking at the model answer.
4. Compare, contrast, review.

Applying that strategy netted me a few good grades in law school.

I'm not saying this strategy is ideal. But it works for me.

I've noticed that by using this strategy, I become more comfortable with the law. By practice essay #3 in a certain topic, I usually just skip step #2. I read the question. Answer it. Then c/c and review. What I'm noticing is that my answer, though not 100% accurate, is similar enough to the model answer. I identify the key issues, key facts, and apply the correct (mostly) law.

Ideally, by practice essays #4-6, my reading and understanding of the prompt are very sharp, so that by exam day, I obtain a good score.

[myrtlewinston]

This. And I hate it when after 3 minutes it asks if I'm still studying or whatever. Like, fucking yes, I'm just slow, okay?

That's why I do the questions in the book rather than online.

[old_soul]

To inject some positivity here -- I am loving Freer. He makes Civ Pro so accessible.

[Outis Onoma]

My approach to the MEE essays likens to how I prepared for my law school exams.

Here's my general strategy:

1. Read the question once.
2. Read the model answer once.
3. Write out my own response to the question without looking at the model answer.
4. Compare, contrast, review.

Applying that strategy netted me a few good grades in law school.

I'm not saying this strategy is ideal. But it works for me.

I've noticed that by using this strategy, I become more comfortable with the law. By practice essay #3 in a certain topic, I usually just skip step #2. I read the question. Answer it. Then c/c and review. What I'm noticing is that my answer, though not 100% accurate, is similar enough to the model answer. I identify the key issues, key facts, and apply the correct (mostly) law.

Ideally, by practice essays #4-6, my reading and understanding of the prompt are very sharp, so that by exam day, I obtain a good score.

I agree with this strategy in general. I have done very few essays so far, but I think it's important to read through the model answers and the checklists, so you can figure out what scores points on the essays, then practicing it yourself. I don't think it's immediately obvious what makes a good bar essay, so you at least need to practice the form. But I've only done a handful of essays so far.

[myrtlewinston]

To inject some positivity here -- I am loving Freer. He makes Civ Pro so accessible.

That is a feat. Vince Alexander is great too.

[3|ink]

To inject some positivity here -- I am loving Freer. He makes Civ Pro so accessible.

Agreed. And his lectures are very thorough.

[Blue Ivy]

Civ Pro Question:

When it comes to the limitation on supplemental jurisdiction, it only applies in diversity cases where the plaintiff is trying to assert a claim against a co-citizen.

For practical purposes, when would this come up? Only in the context of a cross-claim?

Because if any plaintiff was suing any defendant from the same state, wouldn't the claim be kicked out before it even gets to supplement jurisdiction analysis because there is no subject matter jurisdiction in the first place?

[Danger Zone]

Civ Pro Question:

When it comes to the limitation on supplemental jurisdiction, it only applies in diversity cases where the plaintiff is trying to assert a claim against a co-citizen.

For practical purposes, when would this come up? Only in the context of a cross-claim?

Because if any plaintiff was suing any defendant from the same state, wouldn't the claim be kicked out before it even gets to supplement jurisdiction analysis because there is no subject matter jurisdiction in the first place?

The supplemental jurisdiction is what provides the court with subject matter jurisdiction. For example, suppose P sues D under diversity SMJ, and D impleads O on a theory of indemnification. If P wants to bring a claim against O, but P and O happen to be citizens of the same state, no SMJ arises under diversity, but the court can still hear the claim because it has supplemental jurisdiction if the claim by P against O arises from the same transaction or occurrence as the claim by P against D.

[musicfor18]

Civ Pro Question:

When it comes to the limitation on supplemental jurisdiction, it only applies in diversity cases where the plaintiff is trying to assert a claim against a co-citizen.

For practical purposes, when would this come up? Only in the context of a cross-claim?

Because if any plaintiff was suing any defendant from the same state, wouldn't the claim be kicked out before it even gets to supplement jurisdiction analysis because there is no subject matter jurisdiction in the first place?

Starting with your final point first, the whole idea of supplemental jurisdiction is that it is a possible ground for jurisdiction when original subject matter jurisdiction is not present. So, the question you asked in the last paragraph gets at the point of the statutory limitation: we won't let P get around complete diversity by simply using supplemental jurisdiction.

As to your first question, the statute actually lays out the forbidden claims in detail, but Freer just simplifies it by saying "In a diversity action, no supplemental jurisdiction over certain claims by P if it would destroy complete diversity." The specific kinds of claims where supplemental jurisdiction is withdrawn are:

(1) Claims by P against an impleaded TPD
(2) Claims by P against a party who was joined either as a necessary party or permissively
(3) Claims by P against an intervening party
(4) Claims by anyone who is proposed to be joined as a necessary P
(5) Claims by anyone seeking to intervene as a P

There are some open questions about the supplemental jurisdiction statute:

(1) A (NY) sues B (PA). B impleads C (NY), and there's supplemental jurisdiction over C. So far, so good. C files a claim against TPD. The claim arises from the same transaction or occurrence, so all is still good. But what if P has a compulsory counterclaim against TPD? Can he file it? Must he file it?

(2) The statute says nothing about claims by someone is proposed to be joined permissively as a P (as opposed to as a necessary party). Why?

[Killingly]

Decided to abandon BarBri for the most part. The set up/schedule makes no sense to me. My plan:

1. Read long outlines/take additional notes on Critical Pass flashcards
2. Review flashcards
3. Drill Adaptibar questions/dumb BarBri question sets
4. Do the essays once I know the law

The lectures aren't doing a thing for me. Hopefully I pass.