Adaptibar user hangout - July 2017

Discussions related to the bar exam are found in this forum
User avatar
okaygo

Silver
Posts: 790
Joined: Wed Jan 23, 2013 1:23 pm

Re: Adaptibar user hangout - July 2017

Postby okaygo » Thu Jun 22, 2017 11:51 am

Someone please correct me if I'm wrong - but part of me feels like the adapitbae percentage is misleading. I'm at 58% but I feel as if I'm significantly improving in most topics. But it also feels like I'm having an uphill climb getting the % up. Is it accurate to say that I can't really miss any questions at this point to get my % to go up.

User avatar
WestWingWatcher

Bronze
Posts: 176
Joined: Mon Dec 23, 2013 5:08 pm

Re: Adaptibar user hangout - July 2017

Postby WestWingWatcher » Thu Jun 22, 2017 11:55 am

okaygo wrote:Someone please correct me if I'm wrong - but part of me feels like the adapitbae percentage is misleading. I'm at 58% but I feel as if I'm significantly improving in most topics. But it also feels like I'm having an uphill climb getting the % up. Is it accurate to say that I can't really miss any questions at this point to get my % to go up.


I mean, I think what you're saying is just a matter of statistics. The more data points there are, the less effect a data point has (good or bad). But I can see why you're feeling discouraged if you feel like you're improving but not seeing it in the number. Perhaps using the custom range to see your performance over the past week or so will indicate that you are improving as compared to your previous date ranges.

barkschool

Silver
Posts: 967
Joined: Fri Feb 13, 2015 12:05 am

Re: Adaptibar user hangout - July 2017

Postby barkschool » Thu Jun 22, 2017 11:59 am

My performance on these things is inversely proportional to how long I've been awake that day

User avatar
WestWingWatcher

Bronze
Posts: 176
Joined: Mon Dec 23, 2013 5:08 pm

Re: Adaptibar user hangout - July 2017

Postby WestWingWatcher » Thu Jun 22, 2017 12:03 pm

barkschool wrote:My performance on these things is inversely proportional to how long I've been awake that day


I've been trying to do 30 minutes of questions first thing in the morning so I can get used to doing them in sub-optimal morning-brain conditions. You make me thing adding some to the very end of the day to reflect how drained we'll be Day 2 Part 2 might be a good idea.

InterAlia1961

Bronze
Posts: 234
Joined: Tue Feb 28, 2017 3:32 pm

Re: Adaptibar user hangout - July 2017

Postby InterAlia1961 » Thu Jun 22, 2017 12:57 pm

okaygo wrote:Someone please correct me if I'm wrong - but part of me feels like the adapitbae percentage is misleading. I'm at 58% but I feel as if I'm significantly improving in most topics. But it also feels like I'm having an uphill climb getting the % up. Is it accurate to say that I can't really miss any questions at this point to get my % to go up.


That's how it's supposed to work. They are feeding in questions in subjects that you do poorly on while at the same time making sure your skills where you are strong stay sharp. That's why you feel you're improving, because you are in the places you're strong. You'll also improve in the weak areas as you practice, but because they're feeding you new questions in new areas, you'll necessarily have a climb. I'm at 67% percent today. I've been as high as 70.8%. You're fine. You want to be peaking at exam time. Not now.

barkschool

Silver
Posts: 967
Joined: Fri Feb 13, 2015 12:05 am

Re: Adaptibar user hangout - July 2017

Postby barkschool » Thu Jun 22, 2017 1:02 pm

WestWingWatcher wrote:
barkschool wrote:My performance on these things is inversely proportional to how long I've been awake that day


I've been trying to do 30 minutes of questions first thing in the morning so I can get used to doing them in sub-optimal morning-brain conditions. You make me thing adding some to the very end of the day to reflect how drained we'll be Day 2 Part 2 might be a good idea.


Not sure if better or worse. I absolute miss some in the evening, 100% knowing the rule, I just select "no" instead of "yes" (and similar whiffs).

SchneefaLongoria

New
Posts: 16
Joined: Mon Dec 23, 2013 4:15 am

Re: Adaptibar user hangout - July 2017

Postby SchneefaLongoria » Thu Jun 22, 2017 2:39 pm

Can someone help explain this to me? I get that a grandchild can have a 21 year old gap between the rest of his cousins and could violate the RAP if 1) they are all dead when he/she is born and 2) he/she ends up reaching the age of 21.

But why does it matter that the conveyance is made while the testator is still alive? Wouldn't the analysis be the same if the testator has a posthumous child, who ends up having the grandchild that violates the RAP above?

Real Property - Question 239

QUESTION:

A testator owned Hilltop in fee simple. By his will, he devised as follows: "Hilltop to such of my grandchildren who shall reach the age of 21; and by this provision I intend to include all grandchildren whenever born." At the time of his death, the testator had three children and two grandchildren.

Which of the following additions to or changes in the facts above would produce a violation of the common-law Rule Against Perpetuities?

A. A posthumous child was born to the testator.

B. The testator's will expressed the intention to include all afterborn grandchildren in the gift.

C. The instrument was an inter vivos conveyance rather than a will.

D. The testator had no grandchildren living at the time of his death.

EXPLANATION:

Answer C is correct. To be valid under the Rule Against Perpetuities (RAP), all interests must vest within a life-in-being plus twenty-one years. In this case, if the testator were to attempt to make this an inter vivos conveyance, RAP would be violated. For RAP purposes, no person is considered too old to have children. If this was an inter vivos conveyance, the testator could have a child ("A") after the conveyance, and A could have an offspring ("B") after all of A's siblings have died. In this case, B's interest would not vest within a life-in-being (at the time of the conveyance) plus twenty-one years and RAP would be violated. Answers A, B, and D are all incorrect, as none would produce a RAP violation.

RaceJudicata

Gold
Posts: 1704
Joined: Mon Jun 22, 2015 2:51 pm

Re: Adaptibar user hangout - July 2017

Postby RaceJudicata » Thu Jun 22, 2017 3:03 pm

SchneefaLongoria wrote:Can someone help explain this to me? I get that a grandchild can have a 21 year old gap between the rest of his cousins and could violate the RAP if 1) they are all dead when he/she is born and 2) he/she ends up reaching the age of 21.

But why does it matter that the conveyance is made while the testator is still alive? Wouldn't the analysis be the same if the testator has a posthumous child, who ends up having the grandchild that violates the RAP above?

Real Property - Question 239

QUESTION:

A testator owned Hilltop in fee simple. By his will, he devised as follows: "Hilltop to such of my grandchildren who shall reach the age of 21; and by this provision I intend to include all grandchildren whenever born." At the time of his death, the testator had three children and two grandchildren.

Which of the following additions to or changes in the facts above would produce a violation of the common-law Rule Against Perpetuities?

A. A posthumous child was born to the testator.

B. The testator's will expressed the intention to include all afterborn grandchildren in the gift.

C. The instrument was an inter vivos conveyance rather than a will.

D. The testator had no grandchildren living at the time of his death.

EXPLANATION:

Answer C is correct. To be valid under the Rule Against Perpetuities (RAP), all interests must vest within a life-in-being plus twenty-one years. In this case, if the testator were to attempt to make this an inter vivos conveyance, RAP would be violated. For RAP purposes, no person is considered too old to have children. If this was an inter vivos conveyance, the testator could have a child ("A") after the conveyance, and A could have an offspring ("B") after all of A's siblings have died. In this case, B's interest would not vest within a life-in-being (at the time of the conveyance) plus twenty-one years and RAP would be violated. Answers A, B, and D are all incorrect, as none would produce a RAP violation.


If he is alive when he gives the gift he could still have more children, who in turn, could have more grandchildren.

RaceJudicata

Gold
Posts: 1704
Joined: Mon Jun 22, 2015 2:51 pm

Re: Adaptibar user hangout - July 2017

Postby RaceJudicata » Thu Jun 22, 2017 3:06 pm

InterAlia1961 wrote:
okaygo wrote:Someone please correct me if I'm wrong - but part of me feels like the adapitbae percentage is misleading. I'm at 58% but I feel as if I'm significantly improving in most topics. But it also feels like I'm having an uphill climb getting the % up. Is it accurate to say that I can't really miss any questions at this point to get my % to go up.


That's how it's supposed to work. They are feeding in questions in subjects that you do poorly on while at the same time making sure your skills where you are strong stay sharp. That's why you feel you're improving, because you are in the places you're strong. You'll also improve in the weak areas as you practice, but because they're feeding you new questions in new areas, you'll necessarily have a climb. I'm at 67% percent today. I've been as high as 70.8%. You're fine. You want to be peaking at exam time. Not now.


Ya, the algorithm is a blessing and a curse. Sometimes I get a string of my "stronger" subjects and can nail like 5-7 in a row...then I'll get a similar string of weak questions and go 1/7. Overall percentages are ok, but can be frustrating.

SchneefaLongoria

New
Posts: 16
Joined: Mon Dec 23, 2013 4:15 am

Re: Adaptibar user hangout - July 2017

Postby SchneefaLongoria » Thu Jun 22, 2017 3:38 pm

RaceJudicata wrote:
SchneefaLongoria wrote:Can someone help explain this to me? I get that a grandchild can have a 21 year old gap between the rest of his cousins and could violate the RAP if 1) they are all dead when he/she is born and 2) he/she ends up reaching the age of 21.

But why does it matter that the conveyance is made while the testator is still alive? Wouldn't the analysis be the same if the testator has a posthumous child, who ends up having the grandchild that violates the RAP above?

Real Property - Question 239

QUESTION:

A testator owned Hilltop in fee simple. By his will, he devised as follows: "Hilltop to such of my grandchildren who shall reach the age of 21; and by this provision I intend to include all grandchildren whenever born." At the time of his death, the testator had three children and two grandchildren.

Which of the following additions to or changes in the facts above would produce a violation of the common-law Rule Against Perpetuities?

A. A posthumous child was born to the testator.

B. The testator's will expressed the intention to include all afterborn grandchildren in the gift.

C. The instrument was an inter vivos conveyance rather than a will.

D. The testator had no grandchildren living at the time of his death.

EXPLANATION:

Answer C is correct. To be valid under the Rule Against Perpetuities (RAP), all interests must vest within a life-in-being plus twenty-one years. In this case, if the testator were to attempt to make this an inter vivos conveyance, RAP would be violated. For RAP purposes, no person is considered too old to have children. If this was an inter vivos conveyance, the testator could have a child ("A") after the conveyance, and A could have an offspring ("B") after all of A's siblings have died. In this case, B's interest would not vest within a life-in-being (at the time of the conveyance) plus twenty-one years and RAP would be violated. Answers A, B, and D are all incorrect, as none would produce a RAP violation.


If he is alive when he gives the gift he could still have more children, who in turn, could have more grandchildren.


I see that, but if he devises the gift by will, then a posthumous child is born, and that posthumous child produces a grandchild, would that not create the same situation?

kcjlo10

New
Posts: 15
Joined: Tue Jan 15, 2013 6:49 am

Re: Adaptibar user hangout - July 2017

Postby kcjlo10 » Thu Jun 22, 2017 4:13 pm

If anyone needs the discount code, feel free to pm me.

RaceJudicata

Gold
Posts: 1704
Joined: Mon Jun 22, 2015 2:51 pm

Re: Adaptibar user hangout - July 2017

Postby RaceJudicata » Thu Jun 22, 2017 4:25 pm

SchneefaLongoria wrote:
RaceJudicata wrote:
SchneefaLongoria wrote:Can someone help explain this to me? I get that a grandchild can have a 21 year old gap between the rest of his cousins and could violate the RAP if 1) they are all dead when he/she is born and 2) he/she ends up reaching the age of 21.

But why does it matter that the conveyance is made while the testator is still alive? Wouldn't the analysis be the same if the testator has a posthumous child, who ends up having the grandchild that violates the RAP above?

Real Property - Question 239

QUESTION:

A testator owned Hilltop in fee simple. By his will, he devised as follows: "Hilltop to such of my grandchildren who shall reach the age of 21; and by this provision I intend to include all grandchildren whenever born." At the time of his death, the testator had three children and two grandchildren.

Which of the following additions to or changes in the facts above would produce a violation of the common-law Rule Against Perpetuities?

A. A posthumous child was born to the testator.

B. The testator's will expressed the intention to include all afterborn grandchildren in the gift.

C. The instrument was an inter vivos conveyance rather than a will.

D. The testator had no grandchildren living at the time of his death.

EXPLANATION:

Answer C is correct. To be valid under the Rule Against Perpetuities (RAP), all interests must vest within a life-in-being plus twenty-one years. In this case, if the testator were to attempt to make this an inter vivos conveyance, RAP would be violated. For RAP purposes, no person is considered too old to have children. If this was an inter vivos conveyance, the testator could have a child ("A") after the conveyance, and A could have an offspring ("B") after all of A's siblings have died. In this case, B's interest would not vest within a life-in-being (at the time of the conveyance) plus twenty-one years and RAP would be violated. Answers A, B, and D are all incorrect, as none would produce a RAP violation.


If he is alive when he gives the gift he could still have more children, who in turn, could have more grandchildren.


I see that, but if he devises the gift by will, then a posthumous child is born, and that posthumous child produces a grandchild, would that not create the same situation?


Ya, I see your point. . . and now I've confused myself lol..

barkschool

Silver
Posts: 967
Joined: Fri Feb 13, 2015 12:05 am

Re: Adaptibar user hangout - July 2017

Postby barkschool » Thu Jun 22, 2017 6:23 pm

SchneefaLongoria wrote:QUESTION:
.


* This question is better done via excluding the other options first. Also, the general rule is that a open gift to a class where a requirement is reaching the age of 21 is almost always invalid (thanks barbri).

A testator owned Hilltop in fee simple. By his will, he devised as follows: "Hilltop to such of my grandchildren who shall reach the age of 21; and by this provision I intend to include all grandchildren whenever born." At the time of his death, the testator had three children and two grandchildren.

Which of the following additions to or changes in the facts above would produce a violation of the common-law Rule Against Perpetuities?

**After reading the question you can think to yourself, a gift to a class that must reach 21? That seems like it would be invalid right now.

A. A posthumous child was born to the testator.
——— eliminate this, a new child of the testator has no bearing when his will doesn't include any at a potential beneficiary

B. The testator's will expressed the intention to include all afterborn grandchildren in the gift.
——— eliminate this, statements expressing intention or "hoping" is not a valid conveyance

C. The instrument was an inter vivos conveyance rather than a will.

D. The testator had no grandchildren living at the time of his death.
————— This is more difficult, because if none are living, none could be born quickly enough to grow to 21 before RAP kicks them

Then you're left with 50/50 on D, and C being more correct. Because, you know an open gift right now to kids before they reach 21 are almost never valid.

User avatar
lolabear727

Bronze
Posts: 303
Joined: Mon Jan 02, 2017 9:07 pm

Re: Adaptibar user hangout - July 2017

Postby lolabear727 » Thu Jun 22, 2017 8:57 pm

SchneefaLongoria wrote:Sitting at 56% after 700 questions done. I'm feeling kinda frustrated/worried.


I would stop doing so many questions. If you've already completed 700 and aren't scoring where you feel you need to be I would go back and do outline refresh for a couple days and then hit the questions again. There is a closed amount of questions. If you blow through them you'll see them again in the future and it won't be as helpful. IMO.

Also a suggestion to maybe help give you that self esteem boost. Change your dashboard dates criteria. Change it to 2 weeks ago to present instead of from when you started studying? Just to see how you've improved. That may help motivate you.

User avatar
lolabear727

Bronze
Posts: 303
Joined: Mon Jan 02, 2017 9:07 pm

Re: Adaptibar user hangout - July 2017

Postby lolabear727 » Thu Jun 22, 2017 8:59 pm

okaygo wrote:Someone please correct me if I'm wrong - but part of me feels like the adapitbae percentage is misleading. I'm at 58% but I feel as if I'm significantly improving in most topics. But it also feels like I'm having an uphill climb getting the % up. Is it accurate to say that I can't really miss any questions at this point to get my % to go up.



Maybe change your dates on your dashboard. I change mine from 2 weeks ago to present and it shows a more updated %. you can also play around with it to see which weeks we were doing poorly (or not) and how you are doing currently. Its one of my favorite features about AB.

User avatar
ttam30

New
Posts: 33
Joined: Tue Jan 21, 2014 4:29 pm

Re: Adaptibar user hangout - July 2017

Postby ttam30 » Fri Jun 23, 2017 12:32 am

I don't think I'm supposed to post the actual question here, but I found one I'm confused on. It's #397/Real Property/Titles

Overview:
Owner's son conveys land to his girlfriend before Owner actually conveyed title to Son. Girlfriend records.
Owner then conveys land to Son, which is recorded.
Son conveys to a bonafide buyer who had no knowledge of the girlfriend's claim, and the buyer records.

The answer they give is:
[+] Spoiler
either the girlfriend or the buyer get the land depending on if the girlfriend's deed is deemed recorded in the chain of title.


I don't understand why
[+] Spoiler
the buyer doesn't own it outright (one of the incorrect answers is that the buyer owns it because he paid value without notice of the girlfriend's claim). The girlfriend never properly recorded. Paula Franzese told me the buyer wins in either a notice or race notice system because the girlfriend recorded too early and her recording is therefore a nullity (see pg. 80 in the BarBri lecture handouts), and that the buyer is expected to assume that you can't sell land until you first own it and would not find the sale to the girlfriend. Now, had the girlfriend realized what happened (like she's supposed to, because she never checked the records to see if Son owned the property), she would have properly recorded as soon as the Son got title, and would be saved by estoppel by deed. But this isn't in the prompt so we can't assume it has happened.



Plus, I'm still not convinced by the RAP question above. It looks like every one of those options violates the RAP, because grandchildren could always be born after the testator's death (potentially 80 years later or more), and they therefore wouldn't turn 21 until the RAP kicks in. They're an open class at the time of the testator's death. That should eliminate the devise completely for all the answer choices.

User avatar
okaygo

Silver
Posts: 790
Joined: Wed Jan 23, 2013 1:23 pm

Re: Adaptibar user hangout - July 2017

Postby okaygo » Fri Jun 23, 2017 10:01 am

lolabear727 wrote:
okaygo wrote:Someone please correct me if I'm wrong - but part of me feels like the adapitbae percentage is misleading. I'm at 58% but I feel as if I'm significantly improving in most topics. But it also feels like I'm having an uphill climb getting the % up. Is it accurate to say that I can't really miss any questions at this point to get my % to go up.



Maybe change your dates on your dashboard. I change mine from 2 weeks ago to present and it shows a more updated %. you can also play around with it to see which weeks we were doing poorly (or not) and how you are doing currently. Its one of my favorite features about AB.


I didnt know you could do that!Just did it and it gave me an updated percentage for dash and subject performance - gives me a better idea of where I stand now. Thanks so much! And thanks for everyone else's advice too. :mrgreen:

User avatar
lolabear727

Bronze
Posts: 303
Joined: Mon Jan 02, 2017 9:07 pm

Re: Adaptibar user hangout - July 2017

Postby lolabear727 » Fri Jun 23, 2017 3:02 pm

okaygo wrote:
lolabear727 wrote:
okaygo wrote:Someone please correct me if I'm wrong - but part of me feels like the adapitbae percentage is misleading. I'm at 58% but I feel as if I'm significantly improving in most topics. But it also feels like I'm having an uphill climb getting the % up. Is it accurate to say that I can't really miss any questions at this point to get my % to go up.



Maybe change your dates on your dashboard. I change mine from 2 weeks ago to present and it shows a more updated %. you can also play around with it to see which weeks we were doing poorly (or not) and how you are doing currently. Its one of my favorite features about AB.


I didnt know you could do that!Just did it and it gave me an updated percentage for dash and subject performance - gives me a better idea of where I stand now. Thanks so much! And thanks for everyone else's advice too. :mrgreen:



YAY! I'm happy to hear that you are doing better! You're welcome! Be sure to use the "flag" tool on questions you want to flag to review later.

Jon_Snow

New
Posts: 77
Joined: Thu Dec 11, 2014 3:02 pm

Re: Adaptibar user hangout - July 2017

Postby Jon_Snow » Fri Jun 23, 2017 3:13 pm

lolabear727 wrote:
okaygo wrote:
lolabear727 wrote:
okaygo wrote:Someone please correct me if I'm wrong - but part of me feels like the adapitbae percentage is misleading. I'm at 58% but I feel as if I'm significantly improving in most topics. But it also feels like I'm having an uphill climb getting the % up. Is it accurate to say that I can't really miss any questions at this point to get my % to go up.



Maybe change your dates on your dashboard. I change mine from 2 weeks ago to present and it shows a more updated %. you can also play around with it to see which weeks we were doing poorly (or not) and how you are doing currently. Its one of my favorite features about AB.


I didnt know you could do that!Just did it and it gave me an updated percentage for dash and subject performance - gives me a better idea of where I stand now. Thanks so much! And thanks for everyone else's advice too. :mrgreen:



YAY! I'm happy to hear that you are doing better! You're welcome! Be sure to use the "flag" tool on questions you want to flag to review later.


How do you do this?

User avatar
lolabear727

Bronze
Posts: 303
Joined: Mon Jan 02, 2017 9:07 pm

Re: Adaptibar user hangout - July 2017

Postby lolabear727 » Sat Jun 24, 2017 7:29 pm

Jon_Snow wrote:
lolabear727 wrote:
okaygo wrote:
lolabear727 wrote:
okaygo wrote:Someone please correct me if I'm wrong - but part of me feels like the adapitbae percentage is misleading. I'm at 58% but I feel as if I'm significantly improving in most topics. But it also feels like I'm having an uphill climb getting the % up. Is it accurate to say that I can't really miss any questions at this point to get my % to go up.



Maybe change your dates on your dashboard. I change mine from 2 weeks ago to present and it shows a more updated %. you can also play around with it to see which weeks we were doing poorly (or not) and how you are doing currently. Its one of my favorite features about AB.


I didnt know you could do that!Just did it and it gave me an updated percentage for dash and subject performance - gives me a better idea of where I stand now. Thanks so much! And thanks for everyone else's advice too. :mrgreen:



YAY! I'm happy to hear that you are doing better! You're welcome! Be sure to use the "flag" tool on questions you want to flag to review later.


How do you do this?


The dates or the flag? The dates are on your dashboard settings, the flag is on each question. You click it and it turns red so it will save it later and you can review past flagged questions.

bballbb02

New
Posts: 92
Joined: Fri Nov 18, 2016 8:45 pm

Re: Adaptibar user hangout - July 2017

Postby bballbb02 » Sun Jun 25, 2017 2:29 pm

Can someone please explain what exactly happens after our first 350 questions?? Do we have to choose what subjects to test and will the program automatically feed our weakest areas??

barkschool

Silver
Posts: 967
Joined: Fri Feb 13, 2015 12:05 am

Re: Adaptibar user hangout - July 2017

Postby barkschool » Sun Jun 25, 2017 4:47 pm

bballbb02 wrote:Can someone please explain what exactly happens after our first 350 questions?? Do we have to choose what subjects to test and will the program automatically feed our weakest areas??


If you select all questions, the program reasonably feeds you your weaker subjects and subtopics—hence the feeling of walking up a muddy hill.

Can anyone offer any experience regarding whether they purposely only select their weaker subjects?

bballbb02

New
Posts: 92
Joined: Fri Nov 18, 2016 8:45 pm

Re: Adaptibar user hangout - July 2017

Postby bballbb02 » Sun Jun 25, 2017 6:15 pm

barkschool wrote:
bballbb02 wrote:Can someone please explain what exactly happens after our first 350 questions?? Do we have to choose what subjects to test and will the program automatically feed our weakest areas??


If you select all questions, the program reasonably feeds you your weaker subjects and subtopics—hence the feeling of walking up a muddy hill.

Can anyone offer any experience regarding whether they purposely only select their weaker subjects?



So if I choose about 3 subjects it will feed me questions in my weaker subtopics??

InterAlia1961

Bronze
Posts: 234
Joined: Tue Feb 28, 2017 3:32 pm

Re: Adaptibar user hangout - July 2017

Postby InterAlia1961 » Sun Jun 25, 2017 6:22 pm

SchneefaLongoria wrote:Can someone help explain this to me? I get that a grandchild can have a 21 year old gap between the rest of his cousins and could violate the RAP if 1) they are all dead when he/she is born and 2) he/she ends up reaching the age of 21.

But why does it matter that the conveyance is made while the testator is still alive? Wouldn't the analysis be the same if the testator has a posthumous child, who ends up having the grandchild that violates the RAP above?

Real Property - Question 239

QUESTION:

A testator owned Hilltop in fee simple. By his will, he devised as follows: "Hilltop to such of my grandchildren who shall reach the age of 21; and by this provision I intend to include all grandchildren whenever born." At the time of his death, the testator had three children and two grandchildren.

Which of the following additions to or changes in the facts above would produce a violation of the common-law Rule Against Perpetuities?

A. A posthumous child was born to the testator.

B. The testator's will expressed the intention to include all afterborn grandchildren in the gift.

C. The instrument was an inter vivos conveyance rather than a will.

D. The testator had no grandchildren living at the time of his death.

EXPLANATION:

Answer C is correct. To be valid under the Rule Against Perpetuities (RAP), all interests must vest within a life-in-being plus twenty-one years. In this case, if the testator were to attempt to make this an inter vivos conveyance, RAP would be violated. For RAP purposes, no person is considered too old to have children. If this was an inter vivos conveyance, the testator could have a child ("A") after the conveyance, and A could have an offspring ("B") after all of A's siblings have died. In this case, B's interest would not vest within a life-in-being (at the time of the conveyance) plus twenty-one years and RAP would be violated. Answers A, B, and D are all incorrect, as none would produce a RAP violation.


If he were to devise by will, the lives in being would be his children. Once he was dead, there can be no more children, so any grandchildren who would take would do so within 21 years of the death of the last living child of the testator. This gift does not violate RAP. If he conveys it while he's living, he could have more children. Since he could have more children, he could have a grandchild born after the 21-year vesting period, so the gift to the grandchildren would fail.

barkschool

Silver
Posts: 967
Joined: Fri Feb 13, 2015 12:05 am

Re: Adaptibar user hangout - July 2017

Postby barkschool » Sun Jun 25, 2017 7:00 pm

bballbb02 wrote:
barkschool wrote:
bballbb02 wrote:Can someone please explain what exactly happens after our first 350 questions?? Do we have to choose what subjects to test and will the program automatically feed our weakest areas??


If you select all questions, the program reasonably feeds you your weaker subjects and subtopics—hence the feeling of walking up a muddy hill.

Can anyone offer any experience regarding whether they purposely only select their weaker subjects?



So if I choose about 3 subjects it will feed me questions in my weaker subtopics??


Call and ask, too specific for me to answer



Return to “Bar Exam Prep and Discussion Forum?

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Google [Bot] and 11 guests