New York Bar (Albany)

Discussions related to the bar exam are found in this forum
Roclandsfinest23

Bronze
Posts: 131
Joined: Sun Jan 19, 2014 11:58 pm

Re: New York Bar (Albany)

Postby Roclandsfinest23 » Tue Feb 21, 2017 9:52 pm

Lizbeth wrote:Also, did anyone add a discussion portion to the 2nd MPT?


I didn't. Didn't see where the instructions said to

yankeeman86

Bronze
Posts: 117
Joined: Tue Feb 21, 2017 7:51 pm

Re: New York Bar (Albany)

Postby yankeeman86 » Tue Feb 21, 2017 9:53 pm

Lizbeth wrote:Also, did anyone add a discussion portion to the 2nd MPT?


No, i think the discussion portion is for the Court to do.

Just facts/law.

yankeeman86

Bronze
Posts: 117
Joined: Tue Feb 21, 2017 7:51 pm

Re: New York Bar (Albany)

Postby yankeeman86 » Tue Feb 21, 2017 9:54 pm

Roclandsfinest23 wrote:
Lizbeth wrote:Also, did anyone add a discussion portion to the 2nd MPT?


I didn't. Didn't see where the instructions said to




my last few conclusions of law did not make much sense. i think this mpt was really about following instructions.

mikefichera

New
Posts: 39
Joined: Sat Feb 11, 2012 3:08 pm

Re: New York Bar (Albany)

Postby mikefichera » Tue Feb 21, 2017 9:55 pm

happyhour1122 wrote:
yankeeman86 wrote:
happyhour1122 wrote:
yankeeman86 wrote:corps was a mess, any idea what was happening?


Derivatives suit
Hold share-demand letter- 90 days unless futile - director denial no good- no court investigation - breach of their fiduciary duty and not protected under BJR.

Anything else?



shareholder entitled to inspect board minutes/accounting records, i think 5 day notice?



Yes that too. 5 day notice.



has to be for a valid purpose, sh's purpose was to sue the corporation, which i don't believe is a valid purpose.

yankeeman86

Bronze
Posts: 117
Joined: Tue Feb 21, 2017 7:51 pm

Re: New York Bar (Albany)

Postby yankeeman86 » Tue Feb 21, 2017 9:56 pm

Lizbeth wrote:Anyone remember if 2nd question asked you to assume that the 2nd marriage was valid or did they ask you to assume the first was valid? :oops:


2nd question asked you to assume common law marriage was valid.

for 1st question, i effed that up and said the valid common law marriage in state a would not be recognized in B.

Jmazz88

New
Posts: 55
Joined: Mon Dec 10, 2012 10:34 am

Re: New York Bar (Albany)

Postby Jmazz88 » Tue Feb 21, 2017 9:57 pm

Completely bombed the Trusts and Corporation questions. Blanked on both. Made up a bunch of stuff. Threw some intent and fiduciary duty stuff in to see if it would stick. Hoping for a miracle.

Family Law, Contracts, and Agency I think were fine, and I at least did average.

For property, I had trouble figuring out what all of the issues were...hope I did enough to at least be average.

When all is said and done, a good MPT and below average to average MEE's is okay, I guess. Depends on tomorrow, of course...

happyhour1122

Silver
Posts: 1060
Joined: Wed Feb 08, 2017 5:08 pm

Re: New York Bar (Albany)

Postby happyhour1122 » Tue Feb 21, 2017 9:57 pm

Lizbeth wrote:Also, did anyone add a discussion portion to the 2nd MPT?


Omg. I did... added last minute...

yankeeman86

Bronze
Posts: 117
Joined: Tue Feb 21, 2017 7:51 pm

Re: New York Bar (Albany)

Postby yankeeman86 » Tue Feb 21, 2017 9:58 pm

mikefichera wrote:
happyhour1122 wrote:
yankeeman86 wrote:
happyhour1122 wrote:
yankeeman86 wrote:corps was a mess, any idea what was happening?


Derivatives suit
Hold share-demand letter- 90 days unless futile - director denial no good- no court investigation - breach of their fiduciary duty and not protected under BJR.

Anything else?



shareholder entitled to inspect board minutes/accounting records, i think 5 day notice?



Yes that too. 5 day notice.



has to be for a valid purpose, sh's purpose was to sue the corporation, which i don't believe is a valid purpose.



for this i said, dismissal was proper because the SH was actually suing the board directly. im not sure if derivative claim is the proper method. usually when a shareholder wants to assert the rights of corp when corp doesnt. i effed this one up.

yankeeman86

Bronze
Posts: 117
Joined: Tue Feb 21, 2017 7:51 pm

Re: New York Bar (Albany)

Postby yankeeman86 » Tue Feb 21, 2017 10:02 pm

Jmazz88 wrote:Completely bombed the Trusts and Corporation questions. Blanked on both. Made up a bunch of stuff. Threw some intent and fiduciary duty stuff in to see if it would stick. Hoping for a miracle.

Family Law, Contracts, and Agency I think were fine, and I at least did average.

For property, I had trouble figuring out what all of the issues were...hope I did enough to at least be average.

When all is said and done, a good MPT and below average to average MEE's is okay, I guess. Depends on tomorrow, of course...



for prop, it was wild. most were landlord/tenant issues - was it reasonable for the landlord to reject assignment to lawyer? i argued both yes and no lol. said lawyers are annoyances! duty to mitigate was satisfied, tenant still needed to perform despite email, contract damages - k price - cover.

mikefichera

New
Posts: 39
Joined: Sat Feb 11, 2012 3:08 pm

Re: New York Bar (Albany)

Postby mikefichera » Tue Feb 21, 2017 10:02 pm

yankeeman86 wrote:
mikefichera wrote:
happyhour1122 wrote:
yankeeman86 wrote:
happyhour1122 wrote:
yankeeman86 wrote:corps was a mess, any idea what was happening?


Derivatives suit
Hold share-demand letter- 90 days unless futile - director denial no good- no court investigation - breach of their fiduciary duty and not protected under BJR.

Anything else?



shareholder entitled to inspect board minutes/accounting records, i think 5 day notice?



Yes that too. 5 day notice.



has to be for a valid purpose, sh's purpose was to sue the corporation, which i don't believe is a valid purpose.



for this i said, dismissal was proper because the SH was actually suing the board directly. im not sure if derivative claim is the proper method. usually when a shareholder wants to assert the rights of corp when corp doesnt. i effed this one up.


what i'm saying is, the SH can only inspect the books for a proper purpose, the reason the SH wanted to inspect the books was solely to sue corporation, and SH is not allowed to inspect books for reasons unrelated to SHs rights. typically a SH can inspect books for purposes of getting addresses of other shareholders for voting purposes or evaluating the value of his shares for purposes of selling.

happyhour1122

Silver
Posts: 1060
Joined: Wed Feb 08, 2017 5:08 pm

Re: New York Bar (Albany)

Postby happyhour1122 » Tue Feb 21, 2017 10:03 pm

yankeeman86 wrote:
mikefichera wrote:
happyhour1122 wrote:
yankeeman86 wrote:
happyhour1122 wrote:
yankeeman86 wrote:corps was a mess, any idea what was happening?


Derivatives suit
Hold share-demand letter- 90 days unless futile - director denial no good- no court investigation - breach of their fiduciary duty and not protected under BJR.

Anything else?



shareholder entitled to inspect board minutes/accounting records, i think 5 day notice?



Yes that too. 5 day notice.



has to be for a valid purpose, sh's purpose was to sue the corporation, which i don't believe is a valid purpose.



for this i said, dismissal was proper because the SH was actually suing the board directly. im not sure if derivative claim is the proper method. usually when a shareholder wants to assert the rights of corp when corp doesnt. i effed this one up.



Similar.
It wasn't for personal benefit so I said derivatives ok

mikefichera

New
Posts: 39
Joined: Sat Feb 11, 2012 3:08 pm

Re: New York Bar (Albany)

Postby mikefichera » Tue Feb 21, 2017 10:03 pm

happyhour1122 wrote:
Lizbeth wrote:Also, did anyone add a discussion portion to the 2nd MPT?


Omg. I did... added last minute...


I didn't, i'm pretty sure the instructions did not say you were supposed to.

Roclandsfinest23

Bronze
Posts: 131
Joined: Sun Jan 19, 2014 11:58 pm

Re: New York Bar (Albany)

Postby Roclandsfinest23 » Tue Feb 21, 2017 10:04 pm

yankeeman86 wrote:
Jmazz88 wrote:Completely bombed the Trusts and Corporation questions. Blanked on both. Made up a bunch of stuff. Threw some intent and fiduciary duty stuff in to see if it would stick. Hoping for a miracle.

Family Law, Contracts, and Agency I think were fine, and I at least did average.

For property, I had trouble figuring out what all of the issues were...hope I did enough to at least be average.

When all is said and done, a good MPT and below average to average MEE's is okay, I guess. Depends on tomorrow, of course...



for prop, it was wild. most were landlord/tenant issues - was it reasonable for the landlord to reject assignment to lawyer? i argued both yes and no lol. said lawyers are annoyances! duty to mitigate was satisfied, tenant still needed to perform despite email, contract damages - k price - cover.




I said there was a valid surrender and acceptance of surrender
Last edited by Roclandsfinest23 on Tue Feb 21, 2017 10:05 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Jmazz88

New
Posts: 55
Joined: Mon Dec 10, 2012 10:34 am

Re: New York Bar (Albany)

Postby Jmazz88 » Tue Feb 21, 2017 10:04 pm

happyhour1122 wrote:
Lizbeth wrote:Also, did anyone add a discussion portion to the 2nd MPT?


Omg. I did... added last minute...


I thought this was only for the court to do? Did it say it in the initial memo?

happyhour1122

Silver
Posts: 1060
Joined: Wed Feb 08, 2017 5:08 pm

Re: New York Bar (Albany)

Postby happyhour1122 » Tue Feb 21, 2017 10:05 pm

mikefichera wrote:
yankeeman86 wrote:
mikefichera wrote:
happyhour1122 wrote:
yankeeman86 wrote:
happyhour1122 wrote:
yankeeman86 wrote:corps was a mess, any idea what was happening?


Derivatives suit
Hold share-demand letter- 90 days unless futile - director denial no good- no court investigation - breach of their fiduciary duty and not protected under BJR.

Anything else?



shareholder entitled to inspect board minutes/accounting records, i think 5 day notice?



Yes that too. 5 day notice.



has to be for a valid purpose, sh's purpose was to sue the corporation, which i don't believe is a valid purpose.



for this i said, dismissal was proper because the SH was actually suing the board directly. im not sure if derivative claim is the proper method. usually when a shareholder wants to assert the rights of corp when corp doesnt. i effed this one up.


what i'm saying is, the SH can only inspect the books for a proper purpose, the reason the SH wanted to inspect the books was solely to sue corporation, and SH is not allowed to inspect books for reasons unrelated to SHs rights. typically a SH can inspect books for purposes of getting addresses of other shareholders for voting purposes or evaluating the value of his shares for purposes of selling.



Good argument.
I didn't see that. I just had SH entitled to request to access with 5 day demand with indication of its purpose. Never thought about the validity of the purpose.

yankeeman86

Bronze
Posts: 117
Joined: Tue Feb 21, 2017 7:51 pm

Re: New York Bar (Albany)

Postby yankeeman86 » Tue Feb 21, 2017 10:05 pm

mikefichera wrote:
yankeeman86 wrote:
mikefichera wrote:
happyhour1122 wrote:
yankeeman86 wrote:
happyhour1122 wrote:
yankeeman86 wrote:corps was a mess, any idea what was happening?


Derivatives suit
Hold share-demand letter- 90 days unless futile - director denial no good- no court investigation - breach of their fiduciary duty and not protected under BJR.

Anything else?



shareholder entitled to inspect board minutes/accounting records, i think 5 day notice?



Yes that too. 5 day notice.



has to be for a valid purpose, sh's purpose was to sue the corporation, which i don't believe is a valid purpose.



for this i said, dismissal was proper because the SH was actually suing the board directly. im not sure if derivative claim is the proper method. usually when a shareholder wants to assert the rights of corp when corp doesnt. i effed this one up.


what i'm saying is, the SH can only inspect the books for a proper purpose, the reason the SH wanted to inspect the books was solely to sue corporation, and SH is not allowed to inspect books for reasons unrelated to SHs rights. typically a SH can inspect books for purposes of getting addresses of other shareholders for voting purposes or evaluating the value of his shares for purposes of selling.




here is the rule - S/Hs have the right to inspect the corporate books and records for any proper purpose. i think checking the records and minutes to see if there was any illegality is valid/proper.
Last edited by yankeeman86 on Tue Feb 21, 2017 10:06 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Jmazz88

New
Posts: 55
Joined: Mon Dec 10, 2012 10:34 am

Re: New York Bar (Albany)

Postby Jmazz88 » Tue Feb 21, 2017 10:05 pm

yankeeman86 wrote:
Jmazz88 wrote:Completely bombed the Trusts and Corporation questions. Blanked on both. Made up a bunch of stuff. Threw some intent and fiduciary duty stuff in to see if it would stick. Hoping for a miracle.

Family Law, Contracts, and Agency I think were fine, and I at least did average.

For property, I had trouble figuring out what all of the issues were...hope I did enough to at least be average.

When all is said and done, a good MPT and below average to average MEE's is okay, I guess. Depends on tomorrow, of course...



for prop, it was wild. most were landlord/tenant issues - was it reasonable for the landlord to reject assignment to lawyer? i argued both yes and no lol. said lawyers are annoyances! duty to mitigate was satisfied, tenant still needed to perform despite email, contract damages - k price - cover.


Yeah arguing the case for both the landlord and tenant was interesting. Basically used the same analysis but changed a couple of things and said that "tenant could argue" "landlord could argue" etc.

yankeeman86

Bronze
Posts: 117
Joined: Tue Feb 21, 2017 7:51 pm

Re: New York Bar (Albany)

Postby yankeeman86 » Tue Feb 21, 2017 10:07 pm

Jmazz88 wrote:
happyhour1122 wrote:
Lizbeth wrote:Also, did anyone add a discussion portion to the 2nd MPT?


Omg. I did... added last minute...


I thought this was only for the court to do? Did it say it in the initial memo?


no discussion

happyhour1122

Silver
Posts: 1060
Joined: Wed Feb 08, 2017 5:08 pm

Re: New York Bar (Albany)

Postby happyhour1122 » Tue Feb 21, 2017 10:08 pm

I also raised statute of frauds issue...
Was not sigmed by anyone and it was a 2 year lease....

yankeeman86

Bronze
Posts: 117
Joined: Tue Feb 21, 2017 7:51 pm

Re: New York Bar (Albany)

Postby yankeeman86 » Tue Feb 21, 2017 10:09 pm

it was a validly executed contract, assignment provision was included.

mikefichera

New
Posts: 39
Joined: Sat Feb 11, 2012 3:08 pm

Re: New York Bar (Albany)

Postby mikefichera » Tue Feb 21, 2017 10:09 pm

happyhour1122 wrote:I also raised statute of frauds issue...
Was not sigmed by anyone and it was a 2 year lease....


maybe, but typically wouldn't they mention the lease was oral or give some fact to indicate a question of validity? also wouldn't possession of the property take it out of SoF?
Last edited by mikefichera on Tue Feb 21, 2017 10:10 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Roclandsfinest23

Bronze
Posts: 131
Joined: Sun Jan 19, 2014 11:58 pm

Re: New York Bar (Albany)

Postby Roclandsfinest23 » Tue Feb 21, 2017 10:09 pm

happyhour1122 wrote:I also raised statute of frauds issue...
Was not sigmed by anyone and it was a 2 year lease....


I argued that as well

happyhour1122

Silver
Posts: 1060
Joined: Wed Feb 08, 2017 5:08 pm

Re: New York Bar (Albany)

Postby happyhour1122 » Tue Feb 21, 2017 10:10 pm

yankeeman86 wrote:
Jmazz88 wrote:
happyhour1122 wrote:
Lizbeth wrote:Also, did anyone add a discussion portion to the 2nd MPT?


Omg. I did... added last minute...


I thought this was only for the court to do? Did it say it in the initial memo?


no discussion



:|
But the instruction indicated explain to the court why 1)Noah should not be no longer appointed 2) why Ruth was entitled to the guardianship.

I used it in the dscussion section

Jmazz88

New
Posts: 55
Joined: Mon Dec 10, 2012 10:34 am

Re: New York Bar (Albany)

Postby Jmazz88 » Tue Feb 21, 2017 10:10 pm

mikefichera wrote:
happyhour1122 wrote:I also raised statute of frauds issue...
Was not sigmed by anyone and it was a 2 year lease....


maybe, but typically wouldn't they mention the lease was oral or give some fact to indicate a question of validity? also wouldn't possession of the property take it out of SoF?


This was my thinking. Oh well..

mikefichera

New
Posts: 39
Joined: Sat Feb 11, 2012 3:08 pm

Re: New York Bar (Albany)

Postby mikefichera » Tue Feb 21, 2017 10:12 pm

happyhour1122 wrote:
yankeeman86 wrote:
Jmazz88 wrote:
happyhour1122 wrote:
Lizbeth wrote:Also, did anyone add a discussion portion to the 2nd MPT?


Omg. I did... added last minute...


I thought this was only for the court to do? Did it say it in the initial memo?


no discussion



:|
But the instruction indicated explain to the court why 1)Noah should not be no longer appointed 2) why Ruth was entitled to the guardianship.

I used it in the dscussion section



they did, but wanted you to include it in your proposed conclusions of law, if you look at one of the cases they gave you; it provided an example of how to do that.



Return to “Bar Exam Prep and Discussion Forum?

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: lateralquestions and 25 guests