2019 February California Bar

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

New
Posts: 12
Joined: Tue Apr 30, 2019 1:56 pm

Re: 2019 February California Bar

Postby Kentshindig » Wed May 01, 2019 7:55 pm

rcharter1978 wrote:It's may, when are results out?
check your email: the bar sent out a memo today.

User avatar
a male human

Partner
Posts: 2133
Joined: Tue Mar 31, 2009 2:42 pm

Re: 2019 February California Bar

Postby a male human » Wed May 01, 2019 8:01 pm

I think rcharter passed already and was just curious :)

Answer is 5/17/2019:
http://www.calbar.ca.gov/Admissions/Exa ... -2019-Exam
https://apps.calbar.ca.gov/exam/default.aspx

Fun part is when the timer turns red

User avatar
DuckDynasty

New
Posts: 28
Joined: Sat Apr 13, 2013 9:18 pm

Re: 2019 February California Bar

Postby DuckDynasty » Wed May 01, 2019 11:56 pm

I noticed that CA bar has updated their attorney applicant system to AIMS.

So I did not pass in July 2018 but noticed that when I logged into AIMS and checked out my July 2018 exam's Details tab, it doesn't list my Applicant Number. Then I checked out my February 2019 exam's Details tab, it does list my Applicant Number. My theory is that the CA bar requires both your File and Applicant Numbers to check to see if your name appears on the pass list, so if your Applicant Number still appears in your Details tab then it might be indicative of good news?

This is probably reading too much into the tea leaves, but is this consistent with everyone else who sat for the Feb 2019 CA bar? It is entirely possible that they just haven't imported results onto the system. The wait's killing me.

hastingsgal

New
Posts: 36
Joined: Thu May 02, 2019 2:08 am

Re: 2019 February California Bar

Postby hastingsgal » Thu May 02, 2019 2:11 am

I'm starting to freak out about results coming back. This was my second time taking it. The first time I did pretty well on the MBEs but failed all of the essays. I thought things went much better walking out but now I am second guessing myself. I can't take this a third time!

User avatar
rcharter1978

Gold
Posts: 4529
Joined: Thu Aug 06, 2015 12:49 pm

Re: 2019 February California Bar

Postby rcharter1978 » Thu May 02, 2019 2:30 am

a male human wrote:I think rcharter passed already and was just curious :)

Answer is 5/17/2019:
http://www.calbar.ca.gov/Admissions/Exa ... -2019-Exam
https://apps.calbar.ca.gov/exam/default.aspx

Fun part is when the timer turns red


LOL, you're always on time, AMH.

Yes, I've already passed, but I appreciate another poster helpfully giving a non-responsive reply for....reasons? :roll:

I would be pretty annoyed if I was frazzled February test taker and wanted a quick response and some assclown chose to tell me to check my email when he damn well knew the answer already.

mr_pobuho

New
Posts: 6
Joined: Thu Apr 04, 2019 11:19 am

Re: 2019 February California Bar

Postby mr_pobuho » Thu May 02, 2019 4:48 pm

I think you might be reading into it a bit. Not sure if CBX would have such an oversight leaking results. But, FWIW mine shows the same as yours. I agree the wait has been terrible. We're almost there!


DuckDynasty wrote:I noticed that CA bar has updated their attorney applicant system to AIMS.

So I did not pass in July 2018 but noticed that when I logged into AIMS and checked out my July 2018 exam's Details tab, it doesn't list my Applicant Number. Then I checked out my February 2019 exam's Details tab, it does list my Applicant Number. My theory is that the CA bar requires both your File and Applicant Numbers to check to see if your name appears on the pass list, so if your Applicant Number still appears in your Details tab then it might be indicative of good news?

This is probably reading too much into the tea leaves, but is this consistent with everyone else who sat for the Feb 2019 CA bar? It is entirely possible that they just haven't imported results onto the system. The wait's killing me.

JakeTappers

Bronze
Posts: 156
Joined: Tue Feb 28, 2017 11:38 pm

Re: 2019 February California Bar

Postby JakeTappers » Thu May 02, 2019 5:42 pm

mr_pobuho wrote:I think you might be reading into it a bit. Not sure if CBX would have such an oversight leaking results. But, FWIW mine shows the same as yours. I agree the wait has been terrible. We're almost there!


DuckDynasty wrote:I noticed that CA bar has updated their attorney applicant system to AIMS.

So I did not pass in July 2018 but noticed that when I logged into AIMS and checked out my July 2018 exam's Details tab, it doesn't list my Applicant Number. Then I checked out my February 2019 exam's Details tab, it does list my Applicant Number. My theory is that the CA bar requires both your File and Applicant Numbers to check to see if your name appears on the pass list, so if your Applicant Number still appears in your Details tab then it might be indicative of good news?

This is probably reading too much into the tea leaves, but is this consistent with everyone else who sat for the Feb 2019 CA bar? It is entirely possible that they just haven't imported results onto the system. The wait's killing me.


Mine does too. But I assume this is a data migration issue more than anything given that its all transferred over. Unless someone can come on and say their applicant number is NOT listed on the Feb 2019 details.

DodgerBlues1991

New
Posts: 62
Joined: Mon Nov 26, 2018 5:31 am

Re: 2019 February California Bar

Postby DodgerBlues1991 » Thu May 02, 2019 6:13 pm

JakeTappers wrote:
mr_pobuho wrote:I think you might be reading into it a bit. Not sure if CBX would have such an oversight leaking results. But, FWIW mine shows the same as yours. I agree the wait has been terrible. We're almost there!


DuckDynasty wrote:I noticed that CA bar has updated their attorney applicant system to AIMS.

So I did not pass in July 2018 but noticed that when I logged into AIMS and checked out my July 2018 exam's Details tab, it doesn't list my Applicant Number. Then I checked out my February 2019 exam's Details tab, it does list my Applicant Number. My theory is that the CA bar requires both your File and Applicant Numbers to check to see if your name appears on the pass list, so if your Applicant Number still appears in your Details tab then it might be indicative of good news?

This is probably reading too much into the tea leaves, but is this consistent with everyone else who sat for the Feb 2019 CA bar? It is entirely possible that they just haven't imported results onto the system. The wait's killing me.


Mine does too. But I assume this is a data migration issue more than anything given that its all transferred over. Unless someone can come on and say their applicant number is NOT listed on the Feb 2019 details.



I think maybe it is not showing July applicant number because that number does not belong to us anymore, as they need it now for the new July takers?

Kentshindig

New
Posts: 12
Joined: Tue Apr 30, 2019 1:56 pm

Re: 2019 February California Bar

Postby Kentshindig » Thu May 02, 2019 11:42 pm

hastingsgal wrote:I'm starting to freak out about results coming back. This was my second time taking it. The first time I did pretty well on the MBEs but failed all of the essays. I thought things went much better walking out but now I am second guessing myself. I can't take this a third time!

The number of times you can take the bar is unlimited, unless you’re cited for foul play. Third time takers are very common. Plus, since repeaters have to wait to register until after the results are released, they’re corralled to the test centers with open seats, so you’re surrounded by a plethora of repeaters in the same boat.

hastingsgal

New
Posts: 36
Joined: Thu May 02, 2019 2:08 am

Re: 2019 February California Bar

Postby hastingsgal » Fri May 03, 2019 1:51 am

mr_pobuho wrote:I think you might be reading into it a bit. Not sure if CBX would have such an oversight leaking results. But, FWIW mine shows the same as yours. I agree the wait has been terrible. We're almost there!


DuckDynasty wrote:I noticed that CA bar has updated their attorney applicant system to AIMS.

So I did not pass in July 2018 but noticed that when I logged into AIMS and checked out my July 2018 exam's Details tab, it doesn't list my Applicant Number. Then I checked out my February 2019 exam's Details tab, it does list my Applicant Number. My theory is that the CA bar requires both your File and Applicant Numbers to check to see if your name appears on the pass list, so if your Applicant Number still appears in your Details tab then it might be indicative of good news?

This is probably reading too much into the tea leaves, but is this consistent with everyone else who sat for the Feb 2019 CA bar? It is entirely possible that they just haven't imported results onto the system. The wait's killing me.


I don't think this means anything.

Happy88

New
Posts: 59
Joined: Sat Jul 14, 2018 2:13 pm

Re: 2019 February California Bar

Postby Happy88 » Fri May 03, 2019 3:59 am

DodgerBlues1991 wrote:
JakeTappers wrote:
mr_pobuho wrote:I think you might be reading into it a bit. Not sure if CBX would have such an oversight leaking results. But, FWIW mine shows the same as yours. I agree the wait has been terrible. We're almost there!


DuckDynasty wrote:I noticed that CA bar has updated their attorney applicant system to AIMS.

So I did not pass in July 2018 but noticed that when I logged into AIMS and checked out my July 2018 exam's Details tab, it doesn't list my Applicant Number. Then I checked out my February 2019 exam's Details tab, it does list my Applicant Number. My theory is that the CA bar requires both your File and Applicant Numbers to check to see if your name appears on the pass list, so if your Applicant Number still appears in your Details tab then it might be indicative of good news?

This is probably reading too much into the tea leaves, but is this consistent with everyone else who sat for the Feb 2019 CA bar? It is entirely possible that they just haven't imported results onto the system. The wait's killing me.


Mine does too. But I assume this is a data migration issue more than anything given that its all transferred over. Unless someone can come on and say their applicant number is NOT listed on the Feb 2019 details.



I think maybe it is not showing July applicant number because that number does not belong to us anymore, as they need it now for the new July takers?


But isn’t the application number the same from July? I can’t recall vividly, but I think my application number was the same as July’s.

User avatar
DuckDynasty

New
Posts: 28
Joined: Sat Apr 13, 2013 9:18 pm

Re: 2019 February California Bar

Postby DuckDynasty » Fri May 03, 2019 12:32 pm

Happy88 wrote:
DodgerBlues1991 wrote:
JakeTappers wrote:
mr_pobuho wrote:I think you might be reading into it a bit. Not sure if CBX would have such an oversight leaking results. But, FWIW mine shows the same as yours. I agree the wait has been terrible. We're almost there!


DuckDynasty wrote:I noticed that CA bar has updated their attorney applicant system to AIMS.

So I did not pass in July 2018 but noticed that when I logged into AIMS and checked out my July 2018 exam's Details tab, it doesn't list my Applicant Number. Then I checked out my February 2019 exam's Details tab, it does list my Applicant Number. My theory is that the CA bar requires both your File and Applicant Numbers to check to see if your name appears on the pass list, so if your Applicant Number still appears in your Details tab then it might be indicative of good news?

This is probably reading too much into the tea leaves, but is this consistent with everyone else who sat for the Feb 2019 CA bar? It is entirely possible that they just haven't imported results onto the system. The wait's killing me.


Mine does too. But I assume this is a data migration issue more than anything given that its all transferred over. Unless someone can come on and say their applicant number is NOT listed on the Feb 2019 details.



I think maybe it is not showing July applicant number because that number does not belong to us anymore, as they need it now for the new July takers?


But isn’t the application number the same from July? I can’t recall vividly, but I think my application number was the same as July’s.


The File Number should be the same across all sittings. The Application Number is different for each exam sitting (think of it as a special password for a specific exam to view your results).

chickenb00b

New
Posts: 18
Joined: Sun Nov 18, 2018 11:58 am

Re: 2019 February California Bar

Postby chickenb00b » Fri May 03, 2019 9:12 pm

maureenwct wrote:I am interested, if anyone knows, in how the examiner's grade issues - are they counting issues that are spotted? Are they assigning different weight to different issues? Must the conclusions be correct to have full point weight? I have reviewed the bar secrets model answers - and frankly, I was all over the map with what I hit and didn't hit. Thinking about the hour time limit, it is the bar to full analysis - I mean simply typing fast enough can be an issue. I also could have, and did, immediately think of other issues outside the time constraints - things that could have been the focus but didn't hit me in the first read thru of the question. I also found it very difficult to truly shape a cogent analysis given the sheer number of issues, perhaps because my recall of rules was too slow. Having heard this review, particularly of the PT where I did write a SOF, I am very disheartened.


I'm only a major bar-prep grader (i.e. not the real deal), but we're trained by someone who has graded CA Bar exams in the past.

Do we count the issues that are spotted? I don't actually go: 1, 2, 3, 4... If you didn't talk about the battery claim, I'll notice. You'll get docked. My students will get a comment on it.

Different weights? Yes absolutely. Small issues (and small as in, the essay question drafters intended it to be small) are worth less. When you read a fact pattern, and assuming you know the relevant law, the obvious issues (i.e. major issues) will jump out at you. You better address those. Guy A punches Guy B in the mouth because he slept with his GF? Address assault, applicable defenses, whatever. But if you studied tort, you must know that was battery.

Conclusions are tricky. There are issues where its more grey, and the conclusion won't matter too much. I.E. it can go either way. This may be rare in Bar exams. More likely in law school exams. It's really hard to imagine you give proper analysis and give the wrong conclusion though.... "A had the intent to punch B because B slept with his mom, A walked up to B and punched him right in the nose, thereby creating physical contact with intent to harm--where the nose is a fragile part of the face. THEREFORE DEFENDANT IS NOT LIABLE FOR BATTERY(?)" Of course, if it's in the grey issues i discussed, "A would argue X, however, B has a good claim for Y. Since it can go either way, a court would likely rule that intent is/isn't met." Then sure it doesn't matter.

hastingsgal

New
Posts: 36
Joined: Thu May 02, 2019 2:08 am

Re: 2019 February California Bar

Postby hastingsgal » Sat May 04, 2019 5:59 pm

chickenb00b wrote:
maureenwct wrote:I am interested, if anyone knows, in how the examiner's grade issues - are they counting issues that are spotted? Are they assigning different weight to different issues? Must the conclusions be correct to have full point weight? I have reviewed the bar secrets model answers - and frankly, I was all over the map with what I hit and didn't hit. Thinking about the hour time limit, it is the bar to full analysis - I mean simply typing fast enough can be an issue. I also could have, and did, immediately think of other issues outside the time constraints - things that could have been the focus but didn't hit me in the first read thru of the question. I also found it very difficult to truly shape a cogent analysis given the sheer number of issues, perhaps because my recall of rules was too slow. Having heard this review, particularly of the PT where I did write a SOF, I am very disheartened.


I'm only a major bar-prep grader (i.e. not the real deal), but we're trained by someone who has graded CA Bar exams in the past.

Do we count the issues that are spotted? I don't actually go: 1, 2, 3, 4... If you didn't talk about the battery claim, I'll notice. You'll get docked. My students will get a comment on it.

Different weights? Yes absolutely. Small issues (and small as in, the essay question drafters intended it to be small) are worth less. When you read a fact pattern, and assuming you know the relevant law, the obvious issues (i.e. major issues) will jump out at you. You better address those. Guy A punches Guy B in the mouth because he slept with his GF? Address assault, applicable defenses, whatever. But if you studied tort, you must know that was battery.

Conclusions are tricky. There are issues where its more grey, and the conclusion won't matter too much. I.E. it can go either way. This may be rare in Bar exams. More likely in law school exams. It's really hard to imagine you give proper analysis and give the wrong conclusion though.... "A had the intent to punch B because B slept with his mom, A walked up to B and punched him right in the nose, thereby creating physical contact with intent to harm--where the nose is a fragile part of the face. THEREFORE DEFENDANT IS NOT LIABLE FOR BATTERY(?)" Of course, if it's in the grey issues i discussed, "A would argue X, however, B has a good claim for Y. Since it can go either way, a court would likely rule that intent is/isn't met." Then sure it doesn't matter.


Question for you - do people lose points if the essay is not in IRAC format?

chickenb00b

New
Posts: 18
Joined: Sun Nov 18, 2018 11:58 am

Re: 2019 February California Bar

Postby chickenb00b » Sat May 04, 2019 10:04 pm

hastingsgal wrote:
Question for you - do people lose points if the essay is not in IRAC format?


This is an interesting question and deserves a comprehensive answer.

We are told to take note of your formatting. Do you have headings? It helps us graders notice which issues are where. Does your community property have that intro paragraph? I expect to see it everytime.

But, do I actually give u a lower score because you didn't follow IRAC? It depends... IRAC takes many forms. The heading can itself be the issue. Or the first sentence can. And if it's a sentence, it can be worded in so many ways. I cannot imagine how one would start a paragraph that isn't somehow considered an issue.

Perhaps... you started a paragraph with a fact that lead you to spot an issue? A punched B in the mouth. Whether that constitutes a battery depends on the elements 1, 2, 3, 4. Works for me.

CRAC works... but the first C would also seem like the issue. Battery is likely met here. It requires 1, 2,3, 4.

So, I guess the answer is IDK. I've never seen another format that is completely not IRAC. But we are not told to make sure the Rule comes before your analysis either. BUT i will take points off if you didnt even lay out the rule... U can't possibly analyze intent without telling me it's required element... I would be lost.

User avatar
a male human

Partner
Posts: 2133
Joined: Tue Mar 31, 2009 2:42 pm

Re: 2019 February California Bar

Postby a male human » Sat May 04, 2019 10:27 pm

chickenb00b wrote:
hastingsgal wrote:
Question for you - do people lose points if the essay is not in IRAC format?


This is an interesting question and deserves a comprehensive answer.

We are told to take note of your formatting. Do you have headings? It helps us graders notice which issues are where. Does your community property have that intro paragraph? I expect to see it everytime.

But, do I actually give u a lower score because you didn't follow IRAC? It depends... IRAC takes many forms. The heading can itself be the issue. Or the first sentence can. And if it's a sentence, it can be worded in so many ways. I cannot imagine how one would start a paragraph that isn't somehow considered an issue.

Perhaps... you started a paragraph with a fact that lead you to spot an issue? A punched B in the mouth. Whether that constitutes a battery depends on the elements 1, 2, 3, 4. Works for me.

CRAC works... but the first C would also seem like the issue. Battery is likely met here. It requires 1, 2,3, 4.

So, I guess the answer is IDK. I've never seen another format that is completely not IRAC. But we are not told to make sure the Rule comes before your analysis either. BUT i will take points off if you didnt even lay out the rule... U can't possibly analyze intent without telling me it's required element... I would be lost.


In other words, you want to see logical reasoning that takes you through to the correct conclusion. And this generally has a sequence you're looking for in terms of issues and syllogistic elements (rule should come before application, for example)?

Happy88

New
Posts: 59
Joined: Sat Jul 14, 2018 2:13 pm

Re: 2019 February California Bar

Postby Happy88 » Mon May 06, 2019 7:20 am

How can I log in into the new system? It's telling me I need to enter my username? I used to sign in with the application number?

chickenb00b

New
Posts: 18
Joined: Sun Nov 18, 2018 11:58 am

Re: 2019 February California Bar

Postby chickenb00b » Tue May 07, 2019 4:57 pm

a male human wrote:
In other words, you want to see logical reasoning that takes you through to the correct conclusion. And this generally has a sequence you're looking for in terms of issues and syllogistic elements (rule should come before application, for example)?


Yes, generally. Though, as I'd imagine (but can't seem to think of one), there are exceptions.

hastingsgal

New
Posts: 36
Joined: Thu May 02, 2019 2:08 am

Re: 2019 February California Bar

Postby hastingsgal » Thu May 09, 2019 2:10 am

Just a little more than one week - I can't handle this!!! It's really unfair they make us wait so long.

jennimarcy

New
Posts: 30
Joined: Mon Oct 01, 2018 3:05 pm

Re: 2019 February California Bar

Postby jennimarcy » Thu May 09, 2019 1:09 pm

The wait has been long for us all. Glad it is less than 9 days to the results.

ReasonablePersonSSC

New
Posts: 56
Joined: Sun Apr 28, 2019 9:14 pm

Re: 2019 February California Bar

Postby ReasonablePersonSSC » Thu May 09, 2019 1:44 pm

jennimarcy wrote:The wait has been long for us all. Glad it is less than 9 days to the results.


July takers wait 30+ days longer.
I hope you never know your score!

hastingsgal

New
Posts: 36
Joined: Thu May 02, 2019 2:08 am

Re: 2019 February California Bar

Postby hastingsgal » Thu May 09, 2019 5:15 pm

ReasonablePersonSSC wrote:
jennimarcy wrote:The wait has been long for us all. Glad it is less than 9 days to the results.


July takers wait 30+ days longer.
I hope you never know your score!


Oh I agree - I had to wait for July too!

JakeTappers

Bronze
Posts: 156
Joined: Tue Feb 28, 2017 11:38 pm

Re: 2019 February California Bar

Postby JakeTappers » Thu May 09, 2019 7:02 pm

Has anyone ever identified a correlation between character and fitness and passing/failing? I would think not, but the timing of my passing has me hoping

ReasonablePersonSSC

New
Posts: 56
Joined: Sun Apr 28, 2019 9:14 pm

Re: 2019 February California Bar

Postby ReasonablePersonSSC » Fri May 10, 2019 9:32 am

JakeTappers wrote:Has anyone ever identified a correlation between character and fitness and passing/failing? I would think not, but the timing of my passing has me hoping


I want to believe that just before the June and December swear-in ceremonies, applicants who have satisfied all requirements but the bar are prioritized. Then as soon as bar results are known, swearing-in packets are sent along with the official pass results. The bar has an incentive to complete those applicants so they receive membership dues from them.

lvogt0503

New
Posts: 3
Joined: Fri Mar 08, 2019 1:38 pm

Re: 2019 February California Bar

Postby lvogt0503 » Fri May 10, 2019 1:37 pm

JakeTappers wrote:Has anyone ever identified a correlation between character and fitness and passing/failing? I would think not, but the timing of my passing has me hoping


My understanding, in speaking to the state bar about this, is that all packets are processed as received. However, when results are released the representative assigned to your case receives a list of all individuals in their workload who passed the bar and those people are prioritized. They try not to delay a swearing in because of moral character. Keep in mind, I was also told that there is a requisite wait period for review. So someone who submitted their packet a week before results is not going to be pushed to the #1 spot just because they passed.



Return to “Bar Exam Prep and Discussion Forum?

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 9 guests