Themis Bar Review Hangout - July 2017

Discussions related to the bar exam are found in this forum
lavarman84

Platinum
Posts: 7712
Joined: Thu May 28, 2015 5:01 pm

Re: Themis Bar Review Hangout - July 2017

Postby lavarman84 » Wed Jun 21, 2017 2:52 am

Slytherpuff wrote:34% complete - I'm going to have to hustle to hit that 75% completion at this point.


You're fine. There are 32 days left (not counting July 4th or the day before the bar). If you do 1.5% per day, you hit 82%. Right now, I am around the same percentage (36% complete). Themis generally gives me about 2% per day to do. And that's very doable.

User avatar
foundingfather

Silver
Posts: 1032
Joined: Tue Oct 29, 2013 10:31 pm

Re: Themis Bar Review Hangout - July 2017

Postby foundingfather » Wed Jun 21, 2017 12:06 pm

I actually though Schott's FL family law lecture was pretty good. He was on point with the handout and fairly clear about everything.

The FL Wills and Trusts lecturer was really hard to follow, though. Like, really hard. I had to rewind several times per video. It seemed like she wasn't following the handout, but making up her own thing as she went.

champloo

Bronze
Posts: 127
Joined: Fri Jun 19, 2015 12:09 pm

Re: Themis Bar Review Hangout - July 2017

Postby champloo » Wed Jun 21, 2017 12:51 pm

some of these mbe pqs are utter bullshit.

User avatar
star fox

Diamond
Posts: 20789
Joined: Fri Feb 01, 2013 4:13 pm

Re: Themis Bar Review Hangout - July 2017

Postby star fox » Wed Jun 21, 2017 4:15 pm

champloo wrote:some of these mbe pqs are utter bullshit.

lol

I had one where it says the third party sues Partnership, Partner A and Partner B in question 1.
In question 2 it asks if the partners are personablly liable.
In sample answer, it says it's implied in the question above that third party only brought suit against the Partnership and so can't recover from the Partners personally.

Like wtf. Read your own questions.

lavarman84

Platinum
Posts: 7712
Joined: Thu May 28, 2015 5:01 pm

Re: Themis Bar Review Hangout - July 2017

Postby lavarman84 » Wed Jun 21, 2017 9:45 pm

foundingfather wrote:I actually though Schott's FL family law lecture was pretty good. He was on point with the handout and fairly clear about everything.

The FL Wills and Trusts lecturer was really hard to follow, though. Like, really hard. I had to rewind several times per video. It seemed like she wasn't following the handout, but making up her own thing as she went.


Yea, Schott was fine. Wills and Trusts fucked me up too. I'm going to have to go HAM on that outline. Because I retained very little from the lectures.

Fireworks2016

New
Posts: 56
Joined: Thu May 05, 2016 1:17 pm

Re: Themis Bar Review Hangout - July 2017

Postby Fireworks2016 » Thu Jun 22, 2017 1:34 pm

Does Themis make any effort to normalize the difficulty of their question sets? I'm getting pretty sick of randomly getting destroyed by a set when I'm averaging 70-75% across the other sets/extra quiz builder sets. Why not spread out the questions that <15% of people are getting right?

J-english

New
Posts: 19
Joined: Wed Sep 21, 2016 4:47 pm

Re: Themis Bar Review Hangout - July 2017

Postby J-english » Thu Jun 22, 2017 2:37 pm

Fireworks2016 wrote:Does Themis make any effort to normalize the difficulty of their question sets? I'm getting pretty sick of randomly getting destroyed by a set when I'm averaging 70-75% across the other sets/extra quiz builder sets. Why not spread out the questions that <15% of people are getting right?


I completely agree!!!! It's really frustrating to be doing just fine and hitting the goal or exceeding it and then suddenly theres a set that's like.... WTF just happened!!!! I'm learning to just take it for what it is and move on to the next one. At the end of the day not all the questions on the exam are going to be like that.

User avatar
azditamo

New
Posts: 87
Joined: Mon Jun 03, 2013 10:45 pm

Re: Themis Bar Review Hangout - July 2017

Postby azditamo » Thu Jun 22, 2017 3:14 pm

Hi,

I had a question regarding Question 4243 on the Practice: Criminal Law Introductory PQs Session 1 (17). Due to the copyright information I will just summarize the relevant facts. Two colleagues decide to steal money from their boss, the plan was as follows: for one of the colleagues to steal the money and hand it off to the other colleague. The plan was executed, however, one of the colleagues took some of the money from the other thief, and now the question says what can the colleague who took money from the other thief be charged with.

I picked one charge of larceny, however, the answer is two counts of larceny (stealing from the boss and the other thief). Thus, my question is how can he be charged with two counts when the money is not the personal property of the thief?

Fireworks2016

New
Posts: 56
Joined: Thu May 05, 2016 1:17 pm

Re: Themis Bar Review Hangout - July 2017

Postby Fireworks2016 » Thu Jun 22, 2017 3:49 pm

azditamo wrote:Hi,

I had a question regarding Question 4243 on the Practice: Criminal Law Introductory PQs Session 1 (17). Due to the copyright information I will just summarize the relevant facts. Two colleagues decide to steal money from their boss, the plan was as follows: for one of the colleagues to steal the money and hand it off to the other colleague. The plan was executed, however, one of the colleagues took some of the money from the other thief, and now the question says what can the colleague who took money from the other thief be charged with.

I picked one charge of larceny, however, the answer is two counts of larceny (stealing from the boss and the other thief). Thus, my question is how can he be charged with two counts when the money is not the personal property of the thief?


I said the same thing. Apparently you can be charged with larceny for stealing another thief's stolen property. I sort of get it from a policy perspective -- it shouldn't matter if you know the property is stolen or not, but still a counterintuitive lesson to learn.

gotsomequestions

Bronze
Posts: 119
Joined: Mon Dec 02, 2013 6:25 pm

Re: Themis Bar Review Hangout - July 2017

Postby gotsomequestions » Thu Jun 22, 2017 5:48 pm

shaynislegend wrote:The questions on the practice exam #2 are laughable. I hope these are all themis questions. Half of them don't even supply enough information to give an answer.


Seconded

gotsomequestions

Bronze
Posts: 119
Joined: Mon Dec 02, 2013 6:25 pm

Re: Themis Bar Review Hangout - July 2017

Postby gotsomequestions » Thu Jun 22, 2017 6:25 pm

Question on MBE Practice Exam #2

Kudos to anyone who can explain what the hell is going on here.

[+] Spoiler
Question 388

As part of a divorce decree, a father was ordered to make monthly child support payments to his son's mother. The father failed to make such payments. At a criminal contempt hearing regarding the father's failure to comply with the child support order, the father's attorney presented evidence as to the father's inability to make such payments, which evidence was disputed by the mother. Under state law, there is a presumption that, with regard to enforcement of a child support order, the parent obligated to make child support payments has the ability to make such payments, since such ability was determined by the court at the time that the order was issued. In addition, the highest state court has ruled that, with regard to imposition of criminal contempt for a failure to make child support payments, the burden of proof as to the inability to make such payments is placed on the father. The court, finding that the father had not met this burden, held the father in criminal contempt and sentenced him to six months in prison. The father has appealed this decision as unconstitutional.

Which of the following is the father's best argument in support of his challenge to the constitutionality of this decision?

Answers:

A presumption in a criminal trial violates the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment.
You Selected: The Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment does not permit the burden of proof to be placed on the person on whom the criminal penalty would be imposed.
Correct Answer: The ability to make child support payments is an element of criminal contempt.
The father's right to trial by jury was violated.
Rationale:

Answer choice C is correct. A state (or the federal government) may not require a person on whom a criminal penalty would be imposed (e.g., a defendant) to disprove an element of the offense. If the ability to make child support payments is an element of criminal contempt, rather than the inability to pay being an affirmative defense, the state cannot require the father to prove his inability to pay. Rather, the state is required to prove the father's ability beyond a reasonable doubt. Answer choice A is incorrect because a presumption does not automatically violate the Due Process Clause. In order to have such effect, the presumption could be either a conclusive presumption that cannot be rebutted (which would relieve the prosecution of having to prove an element of their case), or a rebuttable mandatory presumption (which shifts the burden of proof regarding the element of the offense). To the extent that these presumptions require the trier of fact to accept a fact as proving an element of the crime and disallow the trier of fact from rejecting it, or shift the burden of an element to the defense, they are unconstitutional. Answer choice B is incorrect because the burden of proof with regard to an affirmative defense may be placed on the person on whom the criminal penalty may be imposed (e.g., the defendant). Answer choice D is incorrect because, with regard to criminal contempt, there is a right to trial by jury only if the imprisonment imposed exceeds six months. Here, the father's sentence was six months.

User avatar
SeewhathappensLarry

Bronze
Posts: 115
Joined: Thu Oct 20, 2016 10:25 am

Re: Themis Bar Review Hangout - July 2017

Postby SeewhathappensLarry » Thu Jun 22, 2017 7:09 pm

I wish the MBE questions at least used names for people. It gets so confusing when "one man sold Blackacre to a second man, and a third man had a lien on the property."

SplitMyPants

Gold
Posts: 1663
Joined: Wed Oct 09, 2013 9:22 pm

Re: Themis Bar Review Hangout - July 2017

Postby SplitMyPants » Thu Jun 22, 2017 9:17 pm

evidence MBE pq session #2 spoiler:
[+] Spoiler
scumbag Themis: warns that best evidence rule is often a wrong answer on the MBE; makes it the right answer 90% of the time it's presented... smh

ernie

Bronze
Posts: 169
Joined: Tue Apr 11, 2017 12:34 am

Re: Themis Bar Review Hangout - July 2017

Postby ernie » Thu Jun 22, 2017 10:07 pm

SplitMyPants wrote:evidence MBE pq session #2 spoiler:
[+] Spoiler
scumbag Themis: warns that best evidence rule is often a wrong answer on the MBE; makes it the right answer 90% of the time it's presented... smh

Yeah seriously WTF

Puffman1234

New
Posts: 47
Joined: Sat Jun 17, 2017 2:16 am

Re: Themis Bar Review Hangout - July 2017

Postby Puffman1234 » Thu Jun 22, 2017 10:11 pm

SeewhathappensLarry wrote:I wish the MBE questions at least used names for people. It gets so confusing when "one man sold Blackacre to a second man, and a third man had a lien on the property."


Yeah I have to re-read the questions a lot of the time, especially when there's like 5 mortgages and they're using "owner" "seller" buyer" and shit as their "names." I found one question super annoying that used both "father" and "the man" to refer to the same "elderly man" while using other terms like "buyer" and "son."

If these questions just used variables like X Y Z or A B C I legitimately think my speed would go up a good 30%

User avatar
star fox

Diamond
Posts: 20789
Joined: Fri Feb 01, 2013 4:13 pm

Re: Themis Bar Review Hangout - July 2017

Postby star fox » Thu Jun 22, 2017 10:33 pm

SplitMyPants wrote:evidence MBE pq session #2 spoiler:
[+] Spoiler
scumbag Themis: warns that best evidence rule is often a wrong answer on the MBE; makes it the right answer 90% of the time it's presented... smh

Yeah this pissed me off a lot. Don't give me tips like that and intentionally throw me off.

User avatar
star fox

Diamond
Posts: 20789
Joined: Fri Feb 01, 2013 4:13 pm

Re: Themis Bar Review Hangout - July 2017

Postby star fox » Fri Jun 23, 2017 12:23 am

gotsomequestions wrote:Question on MBE Practice Exam #2

Kudos to anyone who can explain what the hell is going on here.

[+] Spoiler
Question 388

As part of a divorce decree, a father was ordered to make monthly child support payments to his son's mother. The father failed to make such payments. At a criminal contempt hearing regarding the father's failure to comply with the child support order, the father's attorney presented evidence as to the father's inability to make such payments, which evidence was disputed by the mother. Under state law, there is a presumption that, with regard to enforcement of a child support order, the parent obligated to make child support payments has the ability to make such payments, since such ability was determined by the court at the time that the order was issued. In addition, the highest state court has ruled that, with regard to imposition of criminal contempt for a failure to make child support payments, the burden of proof as to the inability to make such payments is placed on the father. The court, finding that the father had not met this burden, held the father in criminal contempt and sentenced him to six months in prison. The father has appealed this decision as unconstitutional.

Which of the following is the father's best argument in support of his challenge to the constitutionality of this decision?

Answers:

A presumption in a criminal trial violates the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment.
You Selected: The Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment does not permit the burden of proof to be placed on the person on whom the criminal penalty would be imposed.
Correct Answer: The ability to make child support payments is an element of criminal contempt.
The father's right to trial by jury was violated.
Rationale:

Answer choice C is correct. A state (or the federal government) may not require a person on whom a criminal penalty would be imposed (e.g., a defendant) to disprove an element of the offense. If the ability to make child support payments is an element of criminal contempt, rather than the inability to pay being an affirmative defense, the state cannot require the father to prove his inability to pay. Rather, the state is required to prove the father's ability beyond a reasonable doubt. Answer choice A is incorrect because a presumption does not automatically violate the Due Process Clause. In order to have such effect, the presumption could be either a conclusive presumption that cannot be rebutted (which would relieve the prosecution of having to prove an element of their case), or a rebuttable mandatory presumption (which shifts the burden of proof regarding the element of the offense). To the extent that these presumptions require the trier of fact to accept a fact as proving an element of the crime and disallow the trier of fact from rejecting it, or shift the burden of an element to the defense, they are unconstitutional. Answer choice B is incorrect because the burden of proof with regard to an affirmative defense may be placed on the person on whom the criminal penalty may be imposed (e.g., the defendant). Answer choice D is incorrect because, with regard to criminal contempt, there is a right to trial by jury only if the imprisonment imposed exceeds six months. Here, the father's sentence was six months.

Well I just read in The family law outline the blurb that provides the information for that question but I hadn't known that yet so I got it wrong on the practice exam.

lavarman84

Platinum
Posts: 7712
Joined: Thu May 28, 2015 5:01 pm

Re: Themis Bar Review Hangout - July 2017

Postby lavarman84 » Fri Jun 23, 2017 7:21 am

gotsomequestions wrote:Question on MBE Practice Exam #2

Kudos to anyone who can explain what the hell is going on here.

[+] Spoiler
Question 388

As part of a divorce decree, a father was ordered to make monthly child support payments to his son's mother. The father failed to make such payments. At a criminal contempt hearing regarding the father's failure to comply with the child support order, the father's attorney presented evidence as to the father's inability to make such payments, which evidence was disputed by the mother. Under state law, there is a presumption that, with regard to enforcement of a child support order, the parent obligated to make child support payments has the ability to make such payments, since such ability was determined by the court at the time that the order was issued. In addition, the highest state court has ruled that, with regard to imposition of criminal contempt for a failure to make child support payments, the burden of proof as to the inability to make such payments is placed on the father. The court, finding that the father had not met this burden, held the father in criminal contempt and sentenced him to six months in prison. The father has appealed this decision as unconstitutional.

Which of the following is the father's best argument in support of his challenge to the constitutionality of this decision?

Answers:

A presumption in a criminal trial violates the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment.
You Selected: The Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment does not permit the burden of proof to be placed on the person on whom the criminal penalty would be imposed.
Correct Answer: The ability to make child support payments is an element of criminal contempt.
The father's right to trial by jury was violated.
Rationale:

Answer choice C is correct. A state (or the federal government) may not require a person on whom a criminal penalty would be imposed (e.g., a defendant) to disprove an element of the offense. If the ability to make child support payments is an element of criminal contempt, rather than the inability to pay being an affirmative defense, the state cannot require the father to prove his inability to pay. Rather, the state is required to prove the father's ability beyond a reasonable doubt. Answer choice A is incorrect because a presumption does not automatically violate the Due Process Clause. In order to have such effect, the presumption could be either a conclusive presumption that cannot be rebutted (which would relieve the prosecution of having to prove an element of their case), or a rebuttable mandatory presumption (which shifts the burden of proof regarding the element of the offense). To the extent that these presumptions require the trier of fact to accept a fact as proving an element of the crime and disallow the trier of fact from rejecting it, or shift the burden of an element to the defense, they are unconstitutional. Answer choice B is incorrect because the burden of proof with regard to an affirmative defense may be placed on the person on whom the criminal penalty may be imposed (e.g., the defendant). Answer choice D is incorrect because, with regard to criminal contempt, there is a right to trial by jury only if the imprisonment imposed exceeds six months. Here, the father's sentence was six months.


It's just a brutally tough question, amigo. I think the explanation gives decent reasoning for why. If you read why answer choice C is correct in conjunction with why answer choice A is incorrect, it makes some sense. Basically, answer choice C argues that it is a rebuttable mandatory presumption. As answer choice A explains, presumptions of those sorts are unconstitutional. Accordingly, if the court accepts your argument, it would make the shifting of the burden in this situation unconstitutional.

A is wrong because it's too broad. The same is true with B.

That's just how I made heads or tails of it. But again, I wouldn't sweat it. You don't need to be perfect here, and this seems like one of the more challenging questions you'll find.

As an aside: I'm not sure any of those are arguments I'd actually consider making IRL. I feel like you'd want to use some sort of substantive due process argument drawing on Bearden v. Georgia. But maybe arguing that it was an element of that specific crime would be a means of doing that. I dunno. But it definitely seems like the best answer after reading the explanation.

User avatar
shaynislegend

Bronze
Posts: 228
Joined: Wed Jul 20, 2011 10:40 pm

Re: Themis Bar Review Hangout - July 2017

Postby shaynislegend » Fri Jun 23, 2017 2:12 pm

star fox wrote:
SplitMyPants wrote:evidence MBE pq session #2 spoiler:
[+] Spoiler
scumbag Themis: warns that best evidence rule is often a wrong answer on the MBE; makes it the right answer 90% of the time it's presented... smh

Yeah this pissed me off a lot. Don't give me tips like that and intentionally throw me off.


It's like "for the General welfare will never be a correct answer." Yet, every time I've seen it it's been the correct answer. Same thing with "fighting words legislation will always be overbroad and vague."

LSSS

New
Posts: 19
Joined: Mon Jun 05, 2017 3:54 pm

Re: Themis Bar Review Hangout - July 2017

Postby LSSS » Fri Jun 23, 2017 3:08 pm

If you are sticking to the directed study schedule, what percentage have you completed?

I am at 41% and I am concerned that I am behind.

gotsomequestions

Bronze
Posts: 119
Joined: Mon Dec 02, 2013 6:25 pm

Re: Themis Bar Review Hangout - July 2017

Postby gotsomequestions » Fri Jun 23, 2017 3:38 pm

LSSS wrote:If you are sticking to the directed study schedule, what percentage have you completed?

I am at 41% and I am concerned that I am behind.


I started 5/23 and will be at 52% at the end of today.

User avatar
MelaPela

New
Posts: 80
Joined: Thu Jun 01, 2017 12:41 am

Re: Themis Bar Review Hangout - July 2017

Postby MelaPela » Fri Jun 23, 2017 3:42 pm

Has anyone else watched the lectures by Birdthistle (lol @ his name) and find that he speaks super quickly? I don't know if my brain is just slow today or if he is a speed talker - I usually watch the lecture at 1.5x or 2x and can't follow him at 1.5x.

saywhat88

New
Posts: 12
Joined: Fri Jun 09, 2017 4:49 pm

Re: Themis Bar Review Hangout - July 2017

Postby saywhat88 » Fri Jun 23, 2017 3:49 pm

LSSS wrote:If you are sticking to the directed study schedule, what percentage have you completed?

I am at 41% and I am concerned that I am behind.


im wondering the same thing... at 39% ugh

User avatar
star fox

Diamond
Posts: 20789
Joined: Fri Feb 01, 2013 4:13 pm

Re: Themis Bar Review Hangout - July 2017

Postby star fox » Fri Jun 23, 2017 3:53 pm

MelaPela wrote:Has anyone else watched the lectures by Birdthistle (lol @ his name) and find that he speaks super quickly? I don't know if my brain is just slow today or if he is a speed talker - I usually watch the lecture at 1.5x or 2x and can't follow him at 1.5x.

Yeah he does a crap load of IL stuff, I actually think he's pretty good. He's succinct and doesn't linger.

User avatar
whats an updog

Bronze
Posts: 367
Joined: Thu Sep 11, 2014 2:12 am

Re: Themis Bar Review Hangout - July 2017

Postby whats an updog » Fri Jun 23, 2017 4:41 pm

gotsomequestions wrote:
LSSS wrote:If you are sticking to the directed study schedule, what percentage have you completed?

I am at 41% and I am concerned that I am behind.


I started 5/23 and will be at 52% at the end of today.


Will be at 44% a the end of today. This is pretty much as fast as I can go though, so not gonna stress about it.



Return to “Bar Exam Prep and Discussion Forum?

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: espressounius, Exabot [Bot], Great45, ZipsFan23 and 39 guests