FEB 2018 Bar exam Hangout thread!

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

Bronze
Posts: 385
Joined: Mon Nov 28, 2011 1:55 pm

Re: FEB 2018 Bar exam Hangout thread!

Postby RCinDNA » Thu Feb 01, 2018 8:01 am

Banana1 wrote:Hey Guys,

Hope studying is going well!

Can someone help me understand rule 1367 in in preclusion in diversity cases?

So D can bring in third parties and P cant? what if third party destroys diversity jurisdiction bt P and D2?

I dont get what the rule means as to claims by existing plaintifs against impleader etc.


Do not get psyched out on this because at least one question will involve 1367 - so definitely look this up in your outline again to get the mechanics stuck in your head since it makes sense if you think through what jurisidiction means. Yes, it only allows the defendant to bring in third parties. The third party defendant does not destroy the diversity between the plaintiff and defendant.

User avatar
RCinDNA

Bronze
Posts: 385
Joined: Mon Nov 28, 2011 1:55 pm

Re: FEB 2018 Bar exam Hangout thread!

Postby RCinDNA » Thu Feb 01, 2018 8:21 am

And definitely double check on this but what I meant by “purpose of jurisdiction” is that the federal court gained jurisdiction over the original parties because they satisfied diversity requirements. The court has jurisdiction over the third party defendant’s claim not via the original diversity jurisdiction but through the exercise of supplemental jurisdiction.

Banana1

New
Posts: 86
Joined: Mon Oct 16, 2017 2:49 am

Re: FEB 2018 Bar exam Hangout thread!

Postby Banana1 » Thu Feb 01, 2018 10:02 am

RCinDNA wrote:
Banana1 wrote:Hey Guys,

Hope studying is going well!

Can someone help me understand rule 1367 in in preclusion in diversity cases?

So D can bring in third parties and P cant? what if third party destroys diversity jurisdiction bt P and D2?

I dont get what the rule means as to claims by existing plaintifs against impleader etc.


Do not get psyched out on this because at least one question will involve 1367 - so definitely look this up in your outline again to get the mechanics stuck in your head since it makes sense if you think through what jurisidiction means. Yes, it only allows the defendant to bring in third parties. The third party defendant does not destroy the diversity between the plaintiff and defendant.



I got it! Thank you! Does it come up a lot?

User avatar
RCinDNA

Bronze
Posts: 385
Joined: Mon Nov 28, 2011 1:55 pm

Re: FEB 2018 Bar exam Hangout thread!

Postby RCinDNA » Thu Feb 01, 2018 10:54 am

Banana1 wrote:
RCinDNA wrote:
Banana1 wrote:Hey Guys,

Hope studying is going well!

Can someone help me understand rule 1367 in in preclusion in diversity cases?

So D can bring in third parties and P cant? what if third party destroys diversity jurisdiction bt P and D2?

I dont get what the rule means as to claims by existing plaintifs against impleader etc.


Do not get psyched out on this because at least one question will involve 1367 - so definitely look this up in your outline again to get the mechanics stuck in your head since it makes sense if you think through what jurisidiction means. Yes, it only allows the defendant to bring in third parties. The third party defendant does not destroy the diversity between the plaintiff and defendant.



I got it! Thank you! Does it come up a lot?


In real life, quite often - on the Bar, there will likely be one or two questions on it because it is such an easily testable piece of information. My thought is that any bit of detail that can be tested directly on both a reading comprehension and intermediate application level is likely *to* be tested and I think 1367 falls in that category.

Banana1

New
Posts: 86
Joined: Mon Oct 16, 2017 2:49 am

Re: FEB 2018 Bar exam Hangout thread!

Postby Banana1 » Thu Feb 01, 2018 11:03 am

RCinDNA wrote:
Banana1 wrote:
RCinDNA wrote:
Banana1 wrote:Hey Guys,

Hope studying is going well!

Can someone help me understand rule 1367 in in preclusion in diversity cases?

So D can bring in third parties and P cant? what if third party destroys diversity jurisdiction bt P and D2?

I dont get what the rule means as to claims by existing plaintifs against impleader etc.


Do not get psyched out on this because at least one question will involve 1367 - so definitely look this up in your outline again to get the mechanics stuck in your head since it makes sense if you think through what jurisidiction means. Yes, it only allows the defendant to bring in third parties. The third party defendant does not destroy the diversity between the plaintiff and defendant.



I got it! Thank you! Does it come up a lot?


In real life, quite often - on the Bar, there will likely be one or two questions on it because it is such an easily testable piece of information. My thought is that any bit of detail that can be tested directly on both a reading comprehension and intermediate application level is likely *to* be tested and I think 1367 falls in that category.


Ugh I hate that and erie!

User avatar
streetlawyer

New
Posts: 17
Joined: Tue Feb 14, 2017 5:29 pm

Re: FEB 2018 Bar exam Hangout thread!

Postby streetlawyer » Thu Feb 01, 2018 12:29 pm

Banana1 wrote:
RCinDNA wrote:
Banana1 wrote:
RCinDNA wrote:
Banana1 wrote:Hey Guys,

Hope studying is going well!

Can someone help me understand rule 1367 in in preclusion in diversity cases?

So D can bring in third parties and P cant? what if third party destroys diversity jurisdiction bt P and D2?

I dont get what the rule means as to claims by existing plaintifs against impleader etc.


Do not get psyched out on this because at least one question will involve 1367 - so definitely look this up in your outline again to get the mechanics stuck in your head since it makes sense if you think through what jurisidiction means. Yes, it only allows the defendant to bring in third parties. The third party defendant does not destroy the diversity between the plaintiff and defendant.



I got it! Thank you! Does it come up a lot?


In real life, quite often - on the Bar, there will likely be one or two questions on it because it is such an easily testable piece of information. My thought is that any bit of detail that can be tested directly on both a reading comprehension and intermediate application level is likely *to* be tested and I think 1367 falls in that category.


Ugh I hate that and erie!


I think its easier to understand it by understanding the reason behind it than trying to memorize the whole rule. The Feds don't want a P to sue someone from their own state when they can easily bring the case into state court. They don't want to get involved in every little fight. At the same time it isn't fair to deprive D of indemnification or contribution. So D can and P can't. If P is a slimeball lawyer who decides that he's going to override law by simply suing one without suing the other (and wait for the other guy, D, to bring in D2) than P should be screwed by not being able to file a claim against D2. If P wants D2 than he has to sue in his own state.

I may be wrong but I am starting to think that law school and the bar prep programs aren't doing a good job of explaining these things.

User avatar
RCinDNA

Bronze
Posts: 385
Joined: Mon Nov 28, 2011 1:55 pm

Re: FEB 2018 Bar exam Hangout thread!

Postby RCinDNA » Thu Feb 01, 2018 1:35 pm

streetlawyer wrote:
Banana1 wrote:
RCinDNA wrote:
Banana1 wrote:
RCinDNA wrote:
Banana1 wrote:Hey Guys,

Hope studying is going well!

Can someone help me understand rule 1367 in in preclusion in diversity cases?

So D can bring in third parties and P cant? what if third party destroys diversity jurisdiction bt P and D2?

I dont get what the rule means as to claims by existing plaintifs against impleader etc.


Do not get psyched out on this because at least one question will involve 1367 - so definitely look this up in your outline again to get the mechanics stuck in your head since it makes sense if you think through what jurisidiction means. Yes, it only allows the defendant to bring in third parties. The third party defendant does not destroy the diversity between the plaintiff and defendant.



I got it! Thank you! Does it come up a lot?


In real life, quite often - on the Bar, there will likely be one or two questions on it because it is such an easily testable piece of information. My thought is that any bit of detail that can be tested directly on both a reading comprehension and intermediate application level is likely *to* be tested and I think 1367 falls in that category.


Ugh I hate that and erie!


I think its easier to understand it by understanding the reason behind it than trying to memorize the whole rule. The Feds don't want a P to sue someone from their own state when they can easily bring the case into state court. They don't want to get involved in every little fight. At the same time it isn't fair to deprive D of indemnification or contribution. So D can and P can't. If P is a slimeball lawyer who decides that he's going to override law by simply suing one without suing the other (and wait for the other guy, D, to bring in D2) than P should be screwed by not being able to file a claim against D2. If P wants D2 than he has to sue in his own state.

I may be wrong but I am starting to think that law school and the bar prep programs aren't doing a good job of explaining these things.


That is exactly my understanding and why I was saying to not get psyched out - it makes sense when you look at it from a macro level. I had a great civ pro teacher that made us pick through actual cases so it ended up being a strong subject for me but the prep programs just do not have time.

Erie is another one that you will grow to love. It is so easily applied but people can make it so complex: just look at the operative words - a *federal court* sitting in *diversity* will apply the *substantive* law of the jurisdiction in which it *sits*. I did that from memory bit what does it mean? If State A has a substantive law regarding contracts, a federal court will apply that but if an issue comes up in the case that is *procedural*, such as filing times, the federal court will apply federal rules. But the big one is *diversity* - one part of the analysis is whether diversity jurisdiction is proper but where you may see a question is that in a *federal question* case, because it involves a *federal law* or the *Constitution*, Erie will not apply to the federal portion of the claim. You can get into conflict of law issues from there but there are through lines running through these topics and once you find them, it is a bit easier to see where the examiners can try to trip you up on the MbEs and the MEEs.

Case in point, there were examinees on the July bar who thought the Civ Pro MBE questions were cobflict of law questions - they just did not realize they were most likely being tested on diversity vs federal question jurisdiction.

MissT

New
Posts: 17
Joined: Thu Feb 01, 2018 5:46 pm

Re: FEB 2018 Bar exam Hangout thread!

Postby MissT » Thu Feb 01, 2018 5:52 pm

bretby wrote:Did anyone take the BARBRI practice MBE? I took it yesterday and was really surprised both by where I did well and where I did poorly. Was also surprised that I had so much time left over for each session (between 30 and 45 minutes). Good to have a full practice under my belt, but need to keep the anxiety fires burning to keep me going for this last month.


I took it today. I had the opposite experience- the time pressure was immense. I guessed on a few questions with long fact patterns that I knew would take me a long time to work through, and by the time I got to the last 5 or so questions of each section, I was frantically bubbling in answers without having read the questions, just so that I didn't leave any questions blank.

Does anyone know when national percentile rankings will be released?

User avatar
bretby

Bronze
Posts: 399
Joined: Thu Oct 30, 2014 5:15 pm

Re: FEB 2018 Bar exam Hangout thread!

Postby bretby » Thu Feb 01, 2018 6:25 pm

MissT wrote:
bretby wrote:Did anyone take the BARBRI practice MBE? I took it yesterday and was really surprised both by where I did well and where I did poorly. Was also surprised that I had so much time left over for each session (between 30 and 45 minutes). Good to have a full practice under my belt, but need to keep the anxiety fires burning to keep me going for this last month.


I took it today. I had the opposite experience- the time pressure was immense. I guessed on a few questions with long fact patterns that I knew would take me a long time to work through, and by the time I got to the last 5 or so questions of each section, I was frantically bubbling in answers without having read the questions, just so that I didn't leave any questions blank.

Does anyone know when national percentile rankings will be released?


They're already up. Once you input your answers you go to the last chart on the dashboard and it tells you the percentiles and where you fall.

MissT

New
Posts: 17
Joined: Thu Feb 01, 2018 5:46 pm

Re: FEB 2018 Bar exam Hangout thread!

Postby MissT » Thu Feb 01, 2018 6:53 pm

bretby wrote:
MissT wrote:
bretby wrote:Did anyone take the BARBRI practice MBE? I took it yesterday and was really surprised both by where I did well and where I did poorly. Was also surprised that I had so much time left over for each session (between 30 and 45 minutes). Good to have a full practice under my belt, but need to keep the anxiety fires burning to keep me going for this last month.


I took it today. I had the opposite experience- the time pressure was immense. I guessed on a few questions with long fact patterns that I knew would take me a long time to work through, and by the time I got to the last 5 or so questions of each section, I was frantically bubbling in answers without having read the questions, just so that I didn't leave any questions blank.

Does anyone know when national percentile rankings will be released?


They're already up. Once you input your answers you go to the last chart on the dashboard and it tells you the percentiles and where you fall.


I checked that chart, but under the “percentile rank” it just says “TBD.” Maybe it’s because I took the test a day earlier than scheduled for people in my jurisdiction (PA), though not sure why that would matter, since the rankings are national. Oh well, I figure I’ll get a percentile ranking before long.

User avatar
bretby

Bronze
Posts: 399
Joined: Thu Oct 30, 2014 5:15 pm

Re: FEB 2018 Bar exam Hangout thread!

Postby bretby » Thu Feb 01, 2018 6:58 pm

MissT wrote:
bretby wrote:
MissT wrote:
bretby wrote:Did anyone take the BARBRI practice MBE? I took it yesterday and was really surprised both by where I did well and where I did poorly. Was also surprised that I had so much time left over for each session (between 30 and 45 minutes). Good to have a full practice under my belt, but need to keep the anxiety fires burning to keep me going for this last month.


I took it today. I had the opposite experience- the time pressure was immense. I guessed on a few questions with long fact patterns that I knew would take me a long time to work through, and by the time I got to the last 5 or so questions of each section, I was frantically bubbling in answers without having read the questions, just so that I didn't leave any questions blank.

Does anyone know when national percentile rankings will be released?


They're already up. Once you input your answers you go to the last chart on the dashboard and it tells you the percentiles and where you fall.


I checked that chart, but under the “percentile rank” it just says “TBD.” Maybe it’s because I took the test a day earlier than scheduled for people in my jurisdiction (PA), though not sure why that would matter, since the rankings are national. Oh well, I figure I’ll get a percentile ranking before long.


Yeah, they update the rankings every night, so you should have a ranking tomorrow, I think. Good luck!

olansoderberg

New
Posts: 2
Joined: Thu Feb 01, 2018 10:31 pm

Re: FEB 2018 Bar exam Hangout thread!

Postby olansoderberg » Thu Feb 01, 2018 10:41 pm

Anybody preparing for the MBE tried barpreppal.com? I'm doing a course already but need more practice. these guys seem to have options for cheaper prices (ex: MBE OPE for $60 incl. full analytics). Any guidance would help.

MissT

New
Posts: 17
Joined: Thu Feb 01, 2018 5:46 pm

Re: FEB 2018 Bar exam Hangout thread!

Postby MissT » Fri Feb 02, 2018 8:43 am

Is anyone doing Barbri’s Mini Review? I bought it but am not sure if I’m going to use it. Was wondering if anyone has experience with it and if it’s worth it.

pfunkera

New
Posts: 87
Joined: Sat Dec 07, 2013 3:01 pm

Re: FEB 2018 Bar exam Hangout thread!

Postby pfunkera » Fri Feb 02, 2018 4:49 pm

did the barbri MBE practice exam, and I did better than I thought I would as I was taking it. Also, I thought civ pro was my worst subject but I did the best on that. During the test I thought the torts questions were pretty easy, but that was my worst subject based on the results. 200 questions is brutal though, I will need to make sure I can sleep the night before. I had plenty of time left over for the morning session but was falling behind a little in the afternoon session because I had to really focus and reread a few questions. Had to pick up my pace to finish in time, but still had 10 minutes left. I sure hope my actual exam room has a clock.

User avatar
RCinDNA

Bronze
Posts: 385
Joined: Mon Nov 28, 2011 1:55 pm

Re: FEB 2018 Bar exam Hangout thread!

Postby RCinDNA » Sat Feb 03, 2018 2:35 am

Took the BarBri simulated bar. Actually improved my score by 20 points compared to where I was this past summer. Have to striver harder since the curve during February will be lower and less forgiving, a pfrom what I understand.

Basically, improved all areas overall but I definitely see that on the MBE, my strongest areas from law school and MEE-wise does not translate to superior MBE performance on the bar, so I have to stop slacking and commit to putting as much effort into those as I do my weak areas.

A few drinks tonight but re-trenching tomorrow.

Banana1

New
Posts: 86
Joined: Mon Oct 16, 2017 2:49 am

Re: FEB 2018 Bar exam Hangout thread!

Postby Banana1 » Sat Feb 03, 2018 5:36 am

MissT wrote:Is anyone doing Barbri’s Mini Review? I bought it but am not sure if I’m going to use it. Was wondering if anyone has experience with it and if it’s worth it.


its great

Banana1

New
Posts: 86
Joined: Mon Oct 16, 2017 2:49 am

Re: FEB 2018 Bar exam Hangout thread!

Postby Banana1 » Sat Feb 03, 2018 5:39 am

Banana1 wrote:
RCinDNA wrote:
Banana1 wrote:
RCinDNA wrote:
Banana1 wrote:Hey Guys,

Hope studying is going well!

Can someone help me understand rule 1367 in in preclusion in diversity cases?

So D can bring in third parties and P cant? what if third party destroys diversity jurisdiction bt P and D2?

I dont get what the rule means as to claims by existing plaintifs against impleader etc.


Do not get psyched out on this because at least one question will involve 1367 - so definitely look this up in your outline again to get the mechanics stuck in your head since it makes sense if you think through what jurisidiction means. Yes, it only allows the defendant to bring in third parties. The third party defendant does not destroy the diversity between the plaintiff and defendant.



I got it! Thank you! Does it come up a lot?


In real life, quite often - on the Bar, there will likely be one or two questions on it because it is such an easily testable piece of information. My thought is that any bit of detail that can be tested directly on both a reading comprehension and intermediate application level is likely *to* be tested and I think 1367 falls in that category.


Ugh I hate that and erie!


one more question on this! So I get that SJ is precluded for claims based on diversity but is it precluded only if it destroys diversity of can P still can sue D if they are from different states but amount requirement is not met? or can they not invoke SJ from the outset because the claim does not arise from the same T/O?

User avatar
RCinDNA

Bronze
Posts: 385
Joined: Mon Nov 28, 2011 1:55 pm

Re: FEB 2018 Bar exam Hangout thread!

Postby RCinDNA » Sat Feb 03, 2018 12:56 pm

I do not really understand your question. It sounds like you really just have to see practice questions to understand how this works. Supplemental jurisdiction is discretionary and only exists if there is federal jurisdiction in the first place. A federal court gets jurisdiction if a claim is based on a proper basis such as diversity jurisdiction and/or federal question jurisdiction. This is a specific rule: supplemental jurisdiction for a defendant’s third party claim has no effect on the diversity jurisdiction of the original case. If you read a real case, the court’s opinion will specifically say “we have jurisdiction over this case because of diversity jurisdiction and we will exercise supplemental jurisdiction over the state law claim because...”. 1367(b) is what prevents plaintiffs from asserting supplemental claims in this manner in federal cases based on diversity. 1367(c) lists exceptions as to when a federal court will refuse to exercise supplemental jurisdiction.

Getting a bit nervous because it almost seems to me like you are over-complicating it - try to simplify the rule first and then review questions and essays to see how it works: if there is a diversity claim, only defendants can bring in third party claims under 1367 and a court may decide to exercise supplemental jurisdiction over those. First requirement - there must be diversity so you need to meet the amount in controversy and there must be complete diversity. Second requirement - check to see if it is a plaintiff or defendant asserting a third party claim or joining...if it is a plaintiff, then that is a rules violation and that will not be allowed. Third requirement, if it is a defendant, check to make sure the bew claim is not a novel issue of state law or another 1367(c) violation. If you clear all of those hurdles, the court is highly likely to exerciae supplemental jurisdiction.

Do not get bogged down confusing didferent types of jurisdiction - supplemental jurisdiction does not excuse needing to find proper jurisdiction over the original case in the first place - think of the first claim as a pirate ship that you need to steer and supplemental jurisdiction is a little boat dragged behind the pirate ship and connected to it by a rope with no sails or oars: you ned the oriinal base of jurisdiction to start your journey and after the journey is underway, you can tug boats behind it via supplemental jurisdiction.

Hope that makes sense. Also, I find that it helps to not throw around terms that have meaning in a subject area to describe things in a general way in that area. Since preclusion is a big deal in CivPro, I would not say a plaintiff is “precluded” from bringing a claim - I would say it is prohibited or not allowed by 1367(b).

kc128

Bronze
Posts: 132
Joined: Tue Oct 17, 2017 4:13 pm

Re: FEB 2018 Bar exam Hangout thread!

Postby kc128 » Sat Feb 03, 2018 2:18 pm

RCinDNA wrote:Took the BarBri simulated bar. Actually improved my score by 20 points compared to where I was this past summer. Have to striver harder since the curve during February will be lower and less forgiving, a pfrom what I understand.

Basically, improved all areas overall but I definitely see that on the MBE, my strongest areas from law school and MEE-wise does not translate to superior MBE performance on the bar, so I have to stop slacking and commit to putting as much effort into those as I do my weak areas.

A few drinks tonight but re-trenching tomorrow.


Does Barbri tell you the median score? I used Themis but the info probably won't be available until late this week as their simulated is technically scheduled for Wedneday... I also went up considerably from the simulated I did over the summer, but still not sure I'm happy with it.

If it helps anyone, 112 on the summer simulated (yes, I know...); 131 on July 2017 MBE & failed NY w/ a 262. Let's murder these next few weeks!

User avatar
RCinDNA

Bronze
Posts: 385
Joined: Mon Nov 28, 2011 1:55 pm

Re: FEB 2018 Bar exam Hangout thread!

Postby RCinDNA » Sat Feb 03, 2018 2:29 pm


macgirl

New
Posts: 16
Joined: Mon May 15, 2017 11:46 am

Re: FEB 2018 Bar exam Hangout thread!

Postby macgirl » Sat Feb 03, 2018 9:56 pm

anyone have the link handy for the new themis thread???? thanks!

kc128

Bronze
Posts: 132
Joined: Tue Oct 17, 2017 4:13 pm

Re: FEB 2018 Bar exam Hangout thread!

Postby kc128 » Sat Feb 03, 2018 11:46 pm

macgirl wrote:anyone have the link handy for the new themis thread???? thanks!


viewtopic.php?f=41&t=285709

need all the support we can get, lol.



Return to “Bar Exam Prep and Discussion Forum?

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 21 guests