BarBri Thread: People taking Barbri for July 2013 exam Forum

[goodolgil]

LOL @ the simulated MBE question that required a deducement that some grandson was in gestation (and thus eligible for a class gift) because he was born six months later.

BarBri: never not hiding the ball.

[5ky]

LOL @ the simulated MBE question that required a deducement that some grandson was in gestation (and thus eligible for a class gift) because he was born six months later.

BarBri: never not hiding the ball.

if you had franceze, she definitely covered that in lecture specifically, so i can't hate too much for that question.

[hds2388]

LOL @ the simulated MBE question that required a deducement that some grandson was in gestation (and thus eligible for a class gift) because he was born six months later.

BarBri: never not hiding the ball.

if you had franceze, she definitely covered that in lecture specifically, so i can't hate too much for that question.

#wombrule

[kaiser]

^^^

Can't complain about any 1 property Q (aside from the metes and bounds geometry one), since my overall property score was so low. I got 19 property questions wrong, which was almost exactly 1/3 of all my errors on the test. I need to shore that up real bad.

[goodolgil]

LOL @ the simulated MBE question that required a deducement that some grandson was in gestation (and thus eligible for a class gift) because he was born six months later.

BarBri: never not hiding the ball.

if you had franceze, she definitely covered that in lecture specifically, so i can't hate too much for that question.

#wombrule

I'm more bitching about having to make the connection that since the baby was born six months later, it had to be in gestation when the person died. But yeah, maybe it's obvious to most people. Also, kinda forgot the details of the question so maybe I'm missing a detail that made the question more obvious.

[hds2388]

LOL @ the simulated MBE question that required a deducement that some grandson was in gestation (and thus eligible for a class gift) because he was born six months later.

BarBri: never not hiding the ball.

if you had franceze, she definitely covered that in lecture specifically, so i can't hate too much for that question.

#wombrule

I'm more bitching about having to make the connection that since the baby was born six months later, it had to be in gestation when the person died. But yeah, maybe it's obvious to most people. Also, kinda forgot the details of the question so maybe I'm missing a detail that made the question more obvious.

Haha I completely agree, it wasn't obvious at all. I just thought it was funny that the rule actually got tested. I also think it has a funny name.

[jawsthegreat]

I'd think the sample size from wave 1 and then especially with wave 2 would be big enough that a large part of it would be based on this years' students.

And aside from the few schools like Stanford that have june graduations, I think almost every school is on the same schedule for a state like NY

Spoiler alert: the practice exam is the exact same one they've been using for years. They can probably estimate it based on years of data.

[jawsthegreat]

I'd think the sample size from wave 1 and then especially with wave 2 would be big enough that a large part of it would be based on this years' students.

And aside from the few schools like Stanford that have june graduations, I think almost every school is on the same schedule for a state like NY

Spoiler alert: the practice exam is the exact same one they've been using for years. They can probably estimate it based on years of data.

If you don't believe me just read this thread from 2007, they're talking about the same absurd questions we are. Even the question about the messed up property deed(185 or186)

[5ky]

I'd think the sample size from wave 1 and then especially with wave 2 would be big enough that a large part of it would be based on this years' students.

And aside from the few schools like Stanford that have june graduations, I think almost every school is on the same schedule for a state like NY

Spoiler alert: the practice exam is the exact same one they've been using for years. They can probably estimate it based on years of data.

If you don't believe me just read this thread from 2007, they're talking about the same absurd questions we are. Even the question about the messed up property deed(185 or186)

no, that makes perfect sense to me. bj was just saying he wanted to be curved against students in this cycle, not previous ones.

[Green Crayons]

Hey folks a "forced abortion, forced adoption" legislative enactment doesn't present a substantial federal question, right?

[Tangerine Gleam]

Hey folks a "forced abortion, forced adoption" legislative enactment doesn't present a substantial federal question, right?

It definitely does. That raises big constitutional issues.

[Stinson]

LOL @ the simulated MBE question that required a deducement that some grandson was in gestation (and thus eligible for a class gift) because he was born six months later.

BarBri: never not hiding the ball.

Just to hate on Barbri a little more, I asked my fiancee who had just completed her OB/Gyn rotation whether it was possible to be born after fewer than six months in gestation and survive, and apparently it is possible, albeit unlikely, with proper postnatal care. Wikipedia confirms that babies born at 23 weeks, or about five months and ten days, have about a 20% chance to survive. So the child born six months later may not have been in gestation just because he was born six months later. Ha Barbri, we win.

Now about that fixtures question...

[bgdddymtty]

LOL @ the simulated MBE question that required a deducement that some grandson was in gestation (and thus eligible for a class gift) because he was born six months later.

BarBri: never not hiding the ball.

Just to hate on Barbri a little more, I asked my fiancee who had just completed her OB/Gyn rotation whether it was possible to be born after fewer than six months in gestation and survive, and apparently it is possible, albeit unlikely, with proper postnatal care. Wikipedia confirms that babies born at 23 weeks, or about five months and ten days, have about a 20% chance to survive. So the child born six months later may not have been in gestation just because he was born six months later. Ha Barbri, we win.

Now about that fixtures question...

That's great on the facts, but the issue here is the law. The general rule is that any child born within 300 days of the testator's death is presumed to have already been in gestation.

[0L Hoping for 1]

Anyone else find the Simulated Final Exam completely brutal?

[Stinson]

LOL @ the simulated MBE question that required a deducement that some grandson was in gestation (and thus eligible for a class gift) because he was born six months later.

BarBri: never not hiding the ball.

Just to hate on Barbri a little more, I asked my fiancee who had just completed her OB/Gyn rotation whether it was possible to be born after fewer than six months in gestation and survive, and apparently it is possible, albeit unlikely, with proper postnatal care. Wikipedia confirms that babies born at 23 weeks, or about five months and ten days, have about a 20% chance to survive. So the child born six months later may not have been in gestation just because he was born six months later. Ha Barbri, we win.

Now about that fixtures question...

That's great on the facts, but the issue here is the law. The general rule is that any child born within 300 days of the testator's death is presumed to have already been in gestation.

Oh, I didn't know there was actually a presumption related to it, I thought the rule was just whether the baby was in gestation or not. I guess it makes sense not to look into when the baby was conceived. My lecture with Franseze hit the womb rule but I don't think she mentioned the presumption. Or maybe the presumption was part of one of her songs and I just zoned out.

[rnf1292]

Has anyone done the MPQ2 half day exam (first thing in the book)?

I thought it was extremely tricky and am not happy with my score. As if I wasn't already freaking out enough I thought I had heard others on here saying the MPQ2 was supposed to be easier..

[Joe Quincy]

LOL @ the simulated MBE question that required a deducement that some grandson was in gestation (and thus eligible for a class gift) because he was born six months later.

BarBri: never not hiding the ball.

Just to hate on Barbri a little more, I asked my fiancee who had just completed her OB/Gyn rotation whether it was possible to be born after fewer than six months in gestation and survive, and apparently it is possible, albeit unlikely, with proper postnatal care. Wikipedia confirms that babies born at 23 weeks, or about five months and ten days, have about a 20% chance to survive. So the child born six months later may not have been in gestation just because he was born six months later. Ha Barbri, we win.

Now about that fixtures question...

That's great on the facts, but the issue here is the law. The general rule is that any child born within 300 days of the testator's death is presumed to have already been in gestation.

Oh, I didn't know there was actually a presumption related to it, I thought the rule was just whether the baby was in gestation or not. I guess it makes sense not to look into when the baby was conceived. My lecture with Franseze hit the womb rule but I don't think she mentioned the presumption. Or maybe the presumption was part of one of her songs and I just zoned out.

Her handout said it in VA. Actually she doesn't ever address whether it was ACTUALLY in gestation. The rule she states is just born within 10 months after death.

In Wills, they said the child must be in gestation and must be born within 10 months. So what happens if the kid goes extremely long? I guess they wouldn't be a class member then.

[Myself]

.

[lawdawg09]

The simulated written exam... Ouch.

For the first time I am starting to get concerned...

The next 19 days are going to SUCK.

[bgdddymtty]

I'm losing my mind here. Someone please help me out. What's the name of the modification to comparative negligence whereby a victim who is 50+% (or, in some jurisdictions, >50%) at fault is barred from recovering?

[nevdash]

I'm losing my mind here. Someone please help me out. What's the name of the modification to comparative negligence whereby a victim who is 50+% (or, in some jurisdictions, >50%) at fault is barred from recovering?

Contributory negligence.

[BCLS]

I'm losing my mind here. Someone please help me out. What's the name of the modification to comparative negligence whereby a victim who is 50+% (or, in some jurisdictions, >50%) at fault is barred from recovering?

Contributory negligence.

partial comparative negligence. Contrib is a total bar.

[nevdash]

The simulated written exam... Ouch.

For the first time I am starting to get concerned...

The next 19 days are going to SUCK.

Ugh agreed. Doing 3-hour exams in law school was bad enough, but doing two of them in one day? And then coming back for more testing the next day? Jesus.

[nevdash]

I'm losing my mind here. Someone please help me out. What's the name of the modification to comparative negligence whereby a victim who is 50+% (or, in some jurisdictions, >50%) at fault is barred from recovering?

Contributory negligence.

partial comparative negligence. Contrib is a total bar.

Damnit I just realized my mistake before I saw your post haha. Thanks for the catch.

[BCLS]

I'm losing my mind here. Someone please help me out. What's the name of the modification to comparative negligence whereby a victim who is 50+% (or, in some jurisdictions, >50%) at fault is barred from recovering?

Contributory negligence.

partial comparative negligence. Contrib is a total bar.

Damnit I just realized my mistake before I saw your post haha. Thanks for the catch.

all good man. We are all a bit fried.