California Bar Exam (July 2013) thread Forum

[Old Gregg]

Immigration statute: impermissible commandeering, or OK under some 10A exception I don't know?

I thought congress had plenary power over immigration

[Tangerine Gleam]

Immigration statute: impermissible commandeering, or OK under some 10A exception I don't know?

Congress was commandeering the shit out of the states.

[usuaggie]

Re conspiracy: i did not see an agreement between the two people. He said "I'll think about it" to me that was only solicitation.


Is there a lower REP in public highschools? I thought that school officials can search with RS and not PC? I said search was valid because he had RS.


Does issuing a charter for a private medical school constitute state action? I said no because no public funds went to the school...

I said school officials arent police... (or whatver the equivalent was)

No conspiracy

RS enough

Not sure

[Emma.]

Bunch of cats attracted rats from an apartment building that took shits at lady house. apartment owner put dumpsters out and fixed the problem.
Vicious dog attacked trespasser
School banning a kids religious police club
Male fraternities being treated differently than female sororities at private university

Not sure of any of these, but I had:

Nuisance
Didn't have the dog, must have been experimental
No big deal (general applicability so just RBR)
Intermediate Scrutiny.

[spartjdawg]

Immigration statute: impermissible commandeering, or OK under some 10A exception I don't know?

I thought congress had plenary power over immigration

It does, but it doesn't have the right to commandeer state officials/employees to implement its federal regulation.

[Old Gregg]

Bunch of cats attracted rats from an apartment building that took shits at lady house. apartment owner put dumpsters out and fixed the problem.
Vicious dog attacked trespasser
School banning a kids religious police club
Male fraternities being treated differently than female sororities at private university

private nuisance
experimental
expeirmental.
intermediate scrutiny (i think that was an ansawer choice)

[JDCA2012]

Know I'm gonna get this wrong, but the one where some action fucked up a singer's voice. singer couldn't recover expected earnings, right? im so bad at damages.

It wasn't a contract....I thought in neg, as long as type is foreseeable, extent doesn't matter?

[usuaggie]

Bunch of cats attracted rats from an apartment building that took shits at lady house. apartment owner put dumpsters out and fixed the problem.
Vicious dog attacked trespasser
School banning a kids religious police club
Male fraternities being treated differently than female sororities at private university

Not sure of any of these, but I had:

Nuisance
Didn't have the dog, must have been experimental
No big deal (general applicability so just RBR)
Intermediate Scrutiny.

Agree
Can't use that kind of force to protect property of a shop
Didn't have
Agree


As for the principal, he's a government actor. Doesn't matter he's not police. But RS was right anyway

[lawdawg09]

20 grams of drugs under the seat in rental car? Prior arrests for 20 grams of drugs in rental car = admissible to show common scheme?

[Emma.]

20 grams of drugs under the seat in rental car? Prior arrests for 20 grams of drugs in rental car = admissible to show common scheme?

Oh fuck. I couldn't decide if admissible just for intent, or for intent and possession. Changed my answer back and forth a couple times. Can't remember what I went with in the end.

[usuaggie]

20 grams of drugs under the seat in rental car? Prior arrests for 20 grams of drugs in rental car = admissible to show common scheme?

I put admissible for sale and possession

[Old Gregg]

20 grams of drugs under the seat in rental car? Prior arrests for 20 grams of drugs in rental car = admissible to show common scheme?

i changed my answer to that at the very end. i thought so, but admissible to show possession or intent to sell or both?

[Foosters Galore]

20 grams of drugs under the seat in rental car? Prior arrests for 20 grams of drugs in rental car = admissible to show common scheme?

Oh fuck. I couldn't decide if admissible just for intent, or for intent and possession. Changed my answer back and forth a couple times. Can't remember what I went with in the end.

I think I went with the latter. No idea why.

[Old Gregg]

20 grams of drugs under the seat in rental car? Prior arrests for 20 grams of drugs in rental car = admissible to show common scheme?

Oh fuck. I couldn't decide if admissible just for intent, or for intent and possession. Changed my answer back and forth a couple times. Can't remember what I went with in the end.

same.

[Reinhardt]

.

[uwb09]

Why would IS be applied to a private school's gender discrimination?

[cadestevenson]

did you guys discuss 198 (or so) yet? Kind of mad that I didn't pay attention to all of the supreme court opinions in which Scalia chastised the states for misapplying the Strickland standards.

GD Barbri, is it too much to ask that you include the complete rule statement in the CMR? Are two words too much to ask for?

Good lesson. Don't change your MBE answers. I changed that one from right to wrong. Aren't IAC motions the bane of defense attorneys everywhere? The correct standard appears way too low to me.

[lawdawg09]

did you guys discuss 198 (or so) yet? Kind of mad that I didn't pay attention to all of the supreme court opinions in which Scalia chastised the states for misapplying the Strickland standards.

GD Barbri, is it too much to ask that you include the complete rule statement in the CMR? Are two words too much to ask for?

Good lesson. Don't change your MBE answers. I changed that one from right to wrong. Aren't IAC motions the bane of defense attorneys everywhere? The correct standard appears way too low to me.

My gut said preponderance (whatever the equivalent was). I wanted to change it to C&C but I couldnt do it. I looked it up and the CMR siad it is a "but for" test... Fucking barbri.

[chocolateicecream]

Why would IS be applied to a private school's gender discrimination?

Because they received federal grant money was my reasoning.
Now I might be confusing 2 questions.

[Emma.]

Why would IS be applied to a private school's gender discrimination?

Except for that random med school that specifically took no state funds, every college in this country takes state or federal funds.

[lawdawg09]

Why would IS be applied to a private school's gender discrimination?

IIRC it was a state school?

The medical school that had a admissions quota was a private school.

[Reinhardt]

Shiiiiiieeeet.

[Old Gregg]

Why would IS be applied to a private school's gender discrimination?

IIRC it was a state school?

The medical school that had a admissions quota was a private school.

though operating on a state charter. mixed me up for a second but i reached hte same result.

[uwb09]

IAC is the Strickland two prong test: deficient performance with prejudice (reasonable probability that outcome would have been different but for the deficient performance)

[uwb09]

Ah sorry, got the med school questioned mixed up with the frat one