redblueyellow wrote:I prefer PP SLAP since you get to cover the specifics:
Prurient interest
Patently offensive
lacks Scientific, Literary, Artistic, Political value
This one has really stuck so thank you.
redblueyellow wrote:I prefer PP SLAP since you get to cover the specifics:
Prurient interest
Patently offensive
lacks Scientific, Literary, Artistic, Political value
Pleasye wrote:redblueyellow wrote:I prefer PP SLAP since you get to cover the specifics:
Prurient interest
Patently offensive
lacks Scientific, Literary, Artistic, Political value
This one has really stuck so thank you.
Calicakes wrote:Pleasye wrote:redblueyellow wrote:I prefer PP SLAP since you get to cover the specifics:
Prurient interest
Patently offensive
lacks Scientific, Literary, Artistic, Political value
This one has really stuck so thank you.
Even though I made this one up, I do not even know what a Prurient interest is. I had to look it up.
Prurient Interest = A morbid, degrading and unhealthy interest in sex, as distinguished from a mere candid interest in sex.
Calicakes wrote:redblueyellow wrote:Calicakes wrote:For Prof. Respon. California
Southern California Clients Love fierce counsel donning rolex watches
Duties to clients
Sensible and responsible
Confidentiality
communicate
loyalty
fiduciary
competence
diligence
representation
withdrawal.
What's the sensible and responsible rules?
In regards to sex with clients.
Calicakes wrote:RaiRai wrote:^ that SPARERIBS mnemonic is cool.
Any mnemonic for expert witness requirements for FRE and CA? basic requirements + Daubert/Kumho or Kelley/Frye? Thanks.
Daubert/Kumho
PETA
Peer reviewed and published
Error rate( low)
Tested( and ability to retest)
Acceptance( reasonable rate of)
CA requires general acceptance
redblueyellow wrote:Calicakes wrote:redblueyellow wrote:Calicakes wrote:For Prof. Respon. California
Southern California Clients Love fierce counsel donning rolex watches
Duties to clients
Sensible and responsible
Confidentiality
communicate
loyalty
fiduciary
competence
diligence
representation
withdrawal.
What's the sensible and responsible rules?
In regards to sex with clients.
Ah, gotcha. I don't think I can remember "sensible and responsible," so I'll just memorize it as "sex (don't do it)."
redblueyellow wrote:Calicakes wrote:RaiRai wrote:^ that SPARERIBS mnemonic is cool.
Any mnemonic for expert witness requirements for FRE and CA? basic requirements + Daubert/Kumho or Kelley/Frye? Thanks.
Daubert/Kumho
PETA
Peer reviewed and published
Error rate( low)
Tested( and ability to retest)
Acceptance( reasonable rate of)
CA requires general acceptance
PETA! Nice one!
Calicakes wrote:redblueyellow wrote:Calicakes wrote:redblueyellow wrote:Calicakes wrote:For Prof. Respon. California
Southern California Clients Love fierce counsel donning rolex watches
Duties to clients
Sensible and responsible
Confidentiality
communicate
loyalty
fiduciary
competence
diligence
representation
withdrawal.
What's the sensible and responsible rules?
In regards to sex with clients.
Ah, gotcha. I don't think I can remember "sensible and responsible," so I'll just memorize it as "sex (don't do it)."
Well, technically you can in California as long as 1. you dont demand sexual relations from a client as a condition of representation. 2. no coercion or undue influence. 3. representing a client incompetently because of the sexual relationship.
Calicakes wrote:redblueyellow wrote:Calicakes wrote:RaiRai wrote:^ that SPARERIBS mnemonic is cool.
Any mnemonic for expert witness requirements for FRE and CA? basic requirements + Daubert/Kumho or Kelley/Frye? Thanks.
Daubert/Kumho
PETA
Peer reviewed and published
Error rate( low)
Tested( and ability to retest)
Acceptance( reasonable rate of)
CA requires general acceptance
PETA! Nice one!
Maybe if the lawyering thing doesnt work out, I have a 2nd option for a career. Making up mnemonics most people will forget the day after the exam.
Calicakes wrote:Here are a few for Wills
SWEPT
Elements of a valid will
Signed by adult testator( or w/ someone's help_
writing
End( signature must be at)
Published( that its a will)
Two witnesses
How to attack the validity of a will
Cooking is fun unless I make ( D.I.C.E.D.P's)
Capacity
insane delusions( susceptibility, opportunity, active participation/unnatural result)
Fraud( execution, inducement, preventing recvocation)
Undue influence( presumption, prima facia,statutory)
Mistake
Description
Inducement
Content
execution
DRR
Pretermission
redblueyellow wrote:Calicakes wrote:Here are a few for Wills
SWEPT
Elements of a valid will
Signed by adult testator( or w/ someone's help_
writing
End( signature must be at)
Published( that its a will)
Two witnesses
How to attack the validity of a will
Cooking is fun unless I make ( D.I.C.E.D.P's)
Capacity
insane delusions( susceptibility, opportunity, active participation/unnatural result)
Fraud( execution, inducement, preventing recvocation)
Undue influence( presumption, prima facia,statutory)
Mistake
Description
Inducement
Content
execution
DRR
Pretermission
Are you sure this is true in CA? I know it's accurate generally, but I think CA lets the testator sign anywhere, right?
Also, the attacking will validity one is excellent. I'm bound to forget one of those, so this is great! Just like the CREATES DICE that you had for Con Law! (although I keep forgetting that one regardless)
EDIT: It might be the witnesses in CA that can sign anywhere.
EDIT 2: Quick thing--your insane delusion elements are incorrect. It should be FNBC: false belief, no evidence to support false belief, belief is of sick mind, causation--sick mind affected the will)
redblueyellow wrote:Calicakes wrote:Here are a few for Wills
SWEPT
Elements of a valid will
Signed by adult testator( or w/ someone's help_
writing
End( signature must be at)
Published( that its a will)
Two witnesses
How to attack the validity of a will
Cooking is fun unless I make ( D.I.C.E.D.P's)
Capacity
insane delusions( susceptibility, opportunity, active participation/unnatural result)
Fraud( execution, inducement, preventing recvocation)
Undue influence( presumption, prima facia,statutory)
Mistake
Description
Inducement
Content
execution
DRR
Pretermission
Are you sure this is true in CA? I know it's accurate generally, but I think CA lets the testator sign anywhere, right?
Also, the attacking will validity one is excellent. I'm bound to forget one of those, so this is great! Just like the CREATES DICE that you had for Con Law! (although I keep forgetting that one regardless)
EDIT: It might be the witnesses in CA that can sign anywhere.
EDIT 2: Quick thing--your insane delusion elements are incorrect. It should be FNBC: false belief, no evidence to support false belief, belief is of sick mind, causation--sick mind affected the will)
M_n_M wrote:Did these do jack shit for anyone?
Sue wrote:General Warranty Deed Covenants: SEC FEW (remember it like "few seconds")
Covenant of Seisin
Covenant against Encumbrances
Covenant of right to Convey
Covenant for Further Assurances
Covenant for quiet Enjoyment
Covenant of Warranty
First three are present covenants, next three are future covenants.
lacrossebrother wrote:disappointed this didn't take off.
I think it needs more rigor.
perhaps we should make google docs for each MBE subject with the official ncbe outlines as a shell that can be filled in?
Return to “Bar Exam Prep and Discussion Forum�
Users browsing this forum: FinallyPassedTheBar and 9 guests