Bar course day 1 Forum

[NewHere]

Thumbs up to Agency lecturer.

What?! I just came her to post a big thumbs down on him. Atrocious lecturer. It made me appreciate the ones we've had so far.
And yes, Matthies, it was the one with the strange noises. ("Mmmaaakkkeee them LIABLE.")

[ggocat]

tagging this thread for future reading/discussion.

I'm about ten days into Kaplan's program. I'm doing MBE + general bar review. The MBE stuff was great, but now the guy is reading me the outline out of the book--practically word for word. Baww.

EDIT: And thanks for the advice guys.

[06072010]

Thumbs up to Agency lecturer.

What?! I just came her to post a big thumbs down on him. Atrocious lecturer. It made me appreciate the ones we've had so far.
And yes, Matthies, it was the one with the strange noises. ("Mmmaaakkkeee them LIABLE.")

How can you not like this guy -- he's hilarious! Who does his vocal inflections remind me of. It's like he's a combo of Gilbert Godfrey and Jerry Lewis.

[06072010]

Thumbs up to Agency lecturer.

Is it the bald freaky guy with glasses who makes stargne noises to try and remind you of key topics? He's freaking great, espically his dog thing.

That's the one dude. I'm amazed you can remember him too. I'm looking forward to Paula on Property.

[Matthies]

Thumbs up to Agency lecturer.

What?! I just came her to post a big thumbs down on him. Atrocious lecturer. It made me appreciate the ones we've had so far.
And yes, Matthies, it was the one with the strange noises. ("Mmmaaakkkeee them LIABLE.")

How can you not like this guy -- he's hilarious! Who does his vocal inflections remind me of. It's like he's a combo of Gilbert Godfrey and Jerry Lewis.

Yea I thought he was the best of the bunch, and Chermski or however you spell his name the worst. I mean the Agency?partnership guy is great in a creepy kind of way. His dog thing is the best

[Kochel]

Thumbs up to Agency lecturer.

Is it the bald freaky guy with glasses who makes stargne noises to try and remind you of key topics? He's freaking great, espically his dog thing.

I am amazed at your ability to remember details from your bar prep days. My own experiences are in the distant past, but I discarded all memories of the bar within days of taking the exam.

Only useless details I'm afraid anything that might be usefull, like the rules of evidence or civ pro are compleatly gone.

Ha! I'm a corporate lawyer, so not even evidence and civ pro are useful to me. At least my firm paid for the Barbri course, so all it cost me was two months of my life. What a great profession we're in.

[NewHere]

How can you not like this guy -- he's hilarious

I'm relieved to hear that there are people who liked him, as I was questioning BarBri's judgment in hiring this guy.

I thought some of the voice things were pretty funny, but as a teacher he was just terrible. Going over the simple things five times (with the same voice trick every time), while leaving some hard things hanging in the air without any example or explanation.

[Matthies]

How can you not like this guy -- he's hilarious

I'm relieved to hear that there are people who liked him, as I was questioning BarBri's judgment in hiring this guy.

I thought some of the voice things were pretty funny, but as a teacher he was just terrible. Going over the simple things five times (with the same voice trick every time), while leaving some hard things hanging in the air without any example or explanation.

It was nice he gives you an outline though!

[NewHere]

It was nice he gives you an outline though!

Well, that was well intended indeed, but I wish he had used the time to go over (for example)
- whether an LLC can have members who are not owners. (Instead of dropping a phrase "Members who are owners are not liable for X," suggesting there might be non-owner members.)
- whether an RLLP has GPs or only LLPs. (Instead of saying, twice, "No partner is liable for its debt and obligations, not even GPs. They are all LLPs.")
- some examples of when a sub-agent is or is not controlled by the principal.
- what a 'borrowed agent' is. And whose liability we are talking about -- the borrower's or the lender?
- whether implied authority based on prior dealing exists when the agent believes it exists or when the agent reasonably believes it exists. (I guess it must be "reasonably," but he didn't say it.)

I have several more question marks in my notes, but these were the first few I came across now. Maybe I'm just stupid, but now I have to go through the outlines and figure it out myself. Thanks, lecturer.

[06072010]

I can only answer the borrowed agent question. The liability he discussed is of the borrower. A borrowed agent is where Principal A asks Agent B to do a task. To carry out the task, Agent B asks an employee of another firm (Employee C) to assist him with that task.

So if Principal A asks Agent B to repair a conference room and Agent B gets hires an electrician employed with Pleasantville Electricians, there will be no tort liability for principal due to electricians actions because there is no ability to control the manner in which the electrician performs the task. But the electrician is an agent of Pleasantville Electricians who would be liable.

[DelDad]

Not enjoying Property much, unfortunately - too many tangents and strained song references. Haven't hit agency yet.

[NewHere]

I can only answer the borrowed agent question. The liability he discussed is of the borrower. A borrowed agent is where Principal A asks Agent B to do a task. To carry out the task, Agent B asks an employee of another firm (Employee C) to assist him with that task.

So if Principal A asks Agent B to repair a conference room and Agent B gets hires an electrician employed with Pleasantville Electricians, there will be no tort liability for principal due to electricians actions because there is no ability to control the manner in which the electrician performs the task. But the electrician is an agent of Pleasantville Electricians who would be liable.

Thanks, PK. Are you sure that this is the situation we are talking about, though? Because here, although the electrician is an agent of Pleasantville, the relationship between Agent B and the electrician is that of an employer/hirer and an independent contractor. If this is what we're talking about, though, that makes sense.

[NewHere]

Also, going through the Conviser (short) outline right now, it's clear that the lecturer skipped quite a lot of material. Really, not a good lecturer.

[Matthies]

- whether implied authority based on prior dealing exists when the agent believes it exists or when the agent reasonably believes it exists. (I guess it must be "reasonably," but he didn't say it.)

Its when the agent resonable belives it exists. But the belief of the agencnt must be REASONABLE like a Dr. was an agent of the hsopital and the hosptal told the Dr. he could order "all suplies he needed for the emergancy room" then the doctor ordered like chiropratcors table, but its not needed for an emergancyroom, and it was not reasonable for the doctor to belive it was needed in an emeragncy room, hence no implied authority, it would not be reasonable for a Dr. to order a chrisporatic table for an emeragncy room even if he was allowed to oder "any" supplies he needed. The opposite is also true for the vender, if the vdner knew the doctor was authorized to buy "any supplies needed for an emeragncy room" and had enver sold a chricporator table to an emeragncy room, it would be unreasonable for the vender to belive the doctor had "appreant authority" to oder the chriproctic table. So watch out for the agent or the venders actions seeming resonable, but not really being resonable, becuase they exceed the scope or should know somehthing it wrong (like a an agent has allways bout 2 woirk trucks from a dealer at a time, then one day places an order for 100 trucks, would it be reasonable for the dealer to accpet the agents word that the comapny now wants 50 times what it has ever ordered in the past without verfiying it first?)

[Matthies]

I can only answer the borrowed agent question. The liability he discussed is of the borrower. A borrowed agent is where Principal A asks Agent B to do a task. To carry out the task, Agent B asks an employee of another firm (Employee C) to assist him with that task.

So if Principal A asks Agent B to repair a conference room and Agent B gets hires an electrician employed with Pleasantville Electricians, there will be no tort liability for principal due to electricians actions because there is no ability to control the manner in which the electrician performs the task. But the electrician is an agent of Pleasantville Electricians who would be liable.

Thanks, PK. Are you sure that this is the situation we are talking about, though? Because here, although the electrician is an agent of Pleasantville, the relationship between Agent B and the electrician is that of an employer/hirer and an independent contractor. If this is what we're talking about, though, that makes sense.

I think PK's example would be more like an independant contractor rather than a borrowed agent situation, but the rule is pretty much the same. No liablity unless A+B+C or assent, benfit and control.

[06072010]

Sorry Newhere, I meant to imply that the electrician is a "special employee" of the agent. Borrowed agent is just another way to put the borrowed servant / loaned employee doctrine. For example, a temp service. The temp service pays the employee and has some control over the employee -- like wear the temp staffing uniform or record her hours with the temp company. Tort liability will come down to whether the principal may control the manner in which the temp does their duties.

[06072010]

This is who the lecturer today reminded me of.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FKsNUZ81UwM

[NewHere]

Daily review: thumbs up for NY Practice guy.

(Oh, and thanks again, PK and Matthies.)

[NewHere]

By the way, does BarBri StudySmart (online version) work for anyone today? I keep getting an error message.

[TTT-LS]

,

[NewHere]

Works for me. I like the part where they show your percentile nationwide after you do the problem sets. Silly, I know, but it helps motivate me.

I like that one too! But it isn't working anymore. So actually I have two problems:

1. Since yesterday, the percentile thing stopped working. (But the rest still worked fine.)
2. Since today, I get this:

"To enhance our student's experience the StudySmart software is now available directly from the Barbri.com Enrolled Student Center. To access the software please go to Barbri.com select the Enrolled Student Center, choose your state and select StudySmart software. Sign in using your Barbri.com user name and password."

And doing that (logging in again, etc.) doesn't help. Weird. I e-mailed tech support a few hours ago, but so far no response.

[TTT-LS]

,

[Matthies]

Works for me. I like the part where they show your percentile nationwide after you do the problem sets. Silly, I know, but it helps motivate me.

I like that one too! But it isn't working anymore. So actually I have two problems:

1. Since yesterday, the percentile thing stopped working. (But the rest still worked fine.)
2. Since today, I get this:

"To enhance our student's experience the StudySmart software is now available directly from the Barbri.com Enrolled Student Center. To access the software please go to Barbri.com select the Enrolled Student Center, choose your state and select StudySmart software. Sign in using your Barbri.com user name and password."

And doing that (logging in again, etc.) doesn't help. Weird. I e-mailed tech support a few hours ago, but so far no response.

Try cleaning out your chache, then relaoding the webpage in anew broswer window, also make sure popups/cookies are not blocked.

[Matthies]

Also if anyone is doing the PMBR online questions you can copy/paste the rules staments from the aswers, but you can't in barbri software

[NewHere]

I emptied the cash and threw away BarBri cookies, but it didn't help. Switching to IExplorer did help with regard to Problem #2, but it did not solve Problem #1.

I've been on the line with BarBri tech support for the past half hour (on hold now). The guy I'm talking to is friendly enough, but he seems pretty clueless honestly. I don't think he had ever seen the software before, as I had to explain to him how it is supposed to work. Sigh.