integralx2 wrote: a male human wrote:
integralx2 wrote:Where they written under timed conditions?
kaplan's essays have longer rule paragraphs than actual application
it's bullshit and i feel like i beta tested for them in 2013
Yeah, it makes you feel bad when your not on par, hahaha.
Everybody else I've spoken with (including other Prep course people, tutors, etc.) say not to overdo it with the rule statements. There is simply no point. Simple and sweet, but enough to adequately apply the law. It's about issue spotting and analysis. Don't throw in the kitchen sink.
That, and I've also seen some of Kap's answers be straight up wrong. There was a res judicata and collateral estoppel question where there were two CoA's in the subsequent action by a separate Plaintiff (tort and contract). The prior action involved only a dispute on the K. Which meant, collateral estoppel could be used as to the K issue, but not tort. Kap, however, joined the two CoA's and didn't separate them out--which was blatantly incorrect.
So, I don't think it has anything necessarily to do with not being/feeling "on par." It's definitely a valid criticism, but thanks for being facetious.