BarBri - NY Exam - July 2014 Forum

[TrustMeI'mAnActress]

For example in one question, a non-merchant gave an acceptance expressly conditioned on the fact that he got a merchant's warrant (or some weird interpretation of the warrant of merchantability)

One of the answer choices was basically "battle of the forms--this is a rejection and not an acceptance because of the language "expressly condition" but the correct answer was hidden in an answer choice that the warrant of merchantability is already contained in all contracts (and the "express conditional" language in battle of the forms questions only applies to NEW terms and not terms hidden in the contract).

That is super picky. Makes me nervous because I've gotten into a bad habit of reading the facts and already guessing what answer I'm looking for. There have been a few times when I've picked answer A or B and not even read C or D...

Yeah the trickiness of that question makes me nervous...

[encore1101]

For example in one question, a non-merchant gave an acceptance expressly conditioned on the fact that he got a merchant's warrant (or some weird interpretation of the warrant of merchantability)

One of the answer choices was basically "battle of the forms--this is a rejection and not an acceptance because of the language "expressly condition" but the correct answer was hidden in an answer choice that the warrant of merchantability is already contained in all contracts (and the "express conditional" language in battle of the forms questions only applies to NEW terms and not terms hidden in the contract).

That is super picky. Makes me nervous because I've gotten into a bad habit of reading the facts and already guessing what answer I'm looking for. There have been a few times when I've picked answer A or B and not even read C or D...

The best/worst feeling is when you read a question, and you're like "pfft I know the answer, its going to be <something>."

Scan the answers... not seeing what you were thinking.. crap.

[sarahh]

They are on a computer screen so it's difficult to be completely sure, but they definitely feel much shorter and simpler. I'm not getting frustrated in understanding the question or answer choices like I am with barbri questions. They cut out a lot of extraneous bullshit that sometimes make doing barbri qs exhausting.

That being said, they're much more blunt and to the point. But they seem to be much more nitpicky--if you misread a word or don't think of an exception you'll get it wrong.

I believe there's some free ones on the MBE 2014 outline on its website. Give those a shot and you can see what I mean.

Would love to take a look - would you mind passing along a link? I was trying to find some and had no success.

At the end thereof
--LinkRemoved--

Many thanks!

Thank you so much for posting this!!!. It was good to see, although I wish they had explanations. A few I just do not get the answer, like 1 and 15.

[Guchster]

For example in one question, a non-merchant gave an acceptance expressly conditioned on the fact that he got a merchant's warrant (or some weird interpretation of the warrant of merchantability)

One of the answer choices was basically "battle of the forms--this is a rejection and not an acceptance because of the language "expressly condition" but the correct answer was hidden in an answer choice that the warrant of merchantability is already contained in all contracts (and the "express conditional" language in battle of the forms questions only applies to NEW terms and not terms hidden in the contract).

That is super picky. Makes me nervous because I've gotten into a bad habit of reading the facts and already guessing what answer I'm looking for. There have been a few times when I've picked answer A or B and not even read C or D...

The best/worst feeling is when you read a question, and you're like "pfft I know the answer, its going to be <something>."

Scan the answers... not seeing what you were thinking.. crap.

THE WORST!!!!

[turquoiseturtle]

Thank you so much for posting this!!!. It was good to see, although I wish they had explanations. A few I just do not get the answer, like 1 and 15.

Over in the general Barbri thread there are lengthy discussions of some of these questions.

edit: This is some else's explanation to me of #15 (I also got it wrong)

For #15: This one is tricky, but the key detail is they tell you the price of steel increased 20% and went through the trouble of explaining the biggest steel company got hit by a tornado which is something really crazy/unusual that NO ONE ASSUMED THE RISK OF (that's the key here, no one can assume the risk of something crazy like a tornado hitting a building). Even under the common law, if something this drastic happens to change the circumstances and NO ONE ASSUMED THE RISK of those changed circumstances, then a modification in good faith will be upheld without further consideration. Usually when a modification like this isn't upheld is the situation like the foundation of where they were going to build had a sinkhole or something that made it more expensive for the building company. Well that happens all the time in construction and construction companies know about them, and the construction company is in a better position then the buyer to know whether there's a sinkhole, and so there the DID ASSUME THE RISK. Compare that to a building getting hit by a tornado. Wtf is that? Completely unexpected and so that's the difference.

And this is my explanation of #1: I thought the same for #1 and got it wrong. Making obscene remarks to me doesn't equal getting beaten later. But I think you're right, that you're entitled to the jury instruction because maybe the jury thinks that it is sufficient. Basically we jumped to what the jury would decide, but the question was whether the jury should be allowed to decide. And its least its arguable that it is sufficient. He might not have been entitled to the instruction when his son had never beaten him before and was on the stoop talking about puppies and kittens and rainbows.

[harmonep07]

The "Released MBE Answers" on the website are like, actual MBE answers right?

[thetashster]

ever have that feeling where you're like oh i'm gonna do flashcards

then you do

and you don't remember a single thing.

yeah.

[PennBull]

Yeah I made flash cards for every subject this week, finishing now with property. You really forget a ton of shit when it doesn't come up on the MBE over and over again, but are definitely worth essay points.

Like rule statements are just so so hard to remember for essays, and MBE isn't going to help you because you're not trained to start out EVERY TIME with "evidence must be relevant. Relevant means..." or "a valid contract requires valid offer and acceptance, consideration, and with no defenses..."

I really hope doing this has been worth it

[turquoiseturtle]

Yeah I made flash cards for every subject this week, finishing now with property. You really forget a ton of shit when it doesn't come up on the MBE over and over again, but are definitely worth essay points.

Like rule statements are just so so hard to remember for essays, and MBE isn't going to help you because you're not trained to start out EVERY TIME with "evidence must be relevant. Relevant means..." or "a valid contract requires valid offer and acceptance, consideration, and with no defenses..."

I really hope doing this has been worth it

I think its worth it. Flashcarding is the best way to remember things.

With the way they want you to IRAC, its so easy to leave out things that are so obvious. Like when the issue is a common law contract, whether a breach is material/not material, I just want to jump to that law and analysis. And you start your essay with that issue statement. But then you've gotta go back in time in your rule statement, even if its super obvious there is a contract.

[harmonep07]

What are the consequences of a seller identifying goods to the K vis-a-vis risk of loss and impossibility of performance?

[turquoiseturtle]

What are the consequences of a seller identifying goods to the K vis-a-vis risk of loss and impossibility of performance?

Essay question #82 addresses this some. (I have no idea if this is helpful to y'all at all. I realize I've cited tons of random essays, but its because I really like to see specific application rather than statements of law).

But basically if goods are destroyed: if they've been identified to the contract, the seller is excused from performance due to impossibility. if they haven't been identified, the seller is not excused.

Identification of goods to the contract has nothing to do with the risk of loss. So you can have four potential scenarios.

Where the seller has identified, and does not bear the risk of loss. This scenario would happen when there is a non-merchant seller, and the seller has tendered the goods. If those goods are then destroyed, the seller is excused from performance and didn't bear the risk of loss, so the seller gets to keep the payment.

Where the seller has identified, but does bear the risk of loss. This scenario would happen when there is a merchant seller and the buyer does not yet have possession. Then if the goods are destroyed, the seller does not have to replace the goods but must return the payment by the buyer.

The the seller has not identified the seller is not excused from performing and normal risk of loss rules apply.

[Helpful]

Is it really that bad relying on the belongings room? If you show up at 7:30 is there really a chance you won't get seated in time for the exam or whatever?

[thetashster]

Is it really that bad relying on the belongings room? If you show up at 7:30 is there really a chance you won't get seated in time for the exam or whatever?

I thought they we had to get there at 730 no matter what. Are we supposed to be there at like 6 am and chill in an awkwardly quiet and large room for 3 hours?!

[turquoiseturtle]

Is it really that bad relying on the belongings room? If you show up at 7:30 is there really a chance you won't get seated in time for the exam or whatever?

I thought they we had to get there at 730 no matter what. Are we supposed to be there at like 6 am and chill in an awkwardly quiet and large room for 3 hours?!

From the email:

"TUESDAY, JULY 29: Arrive by 7:30 AM. You must be in your seat no later than 8:30 AM.
WEDNESDAY, JULY 30: Arrive by 8:00 AM. You must be in your seat no later than 9:00 AM."

[Helpful]

I was just asking whether I should show up any earlier if I intend to use the room, since the instructions have constant refrains about the exam is starting at a strict time and not to rely on the belongings room.

[turquoiseturtle]

I was just asking whether I should show up any earlier if I intend to use the room, since the instructions have constant refrains about the exam is starting at a strict time and not to rely on the belongings room.

No idea. I think 5ky is the only person who's posted in here who has actually taken the bar. Plus I have no idea if it varies from location to location. If you're relying on it, I'd get there pretty early. Why risk it?

[klankenburger]

Does anyone know if the "released answers" to essay questions in our NYT book are average, superior, or something else altogether? I've done above average on all my Barbri essays, but am finding a lot of the released answers to be very good--often significantly better than what I wrote in the essays Barbri graded. Does anyone know how good the "released answers" are vis-a-vis where we should be?

[klankenburger]

Does anyone know if the "released answers" to essay questions in our NYT book are average, superior, or something else altogether? I've done above average on all my Barbri essays, but am finding a lot of the released answers to be very good--often significantly better than what I wrote in the essays Barbri graded. Does anyone know how good the "released answers" are vis-a-vis where we should be?

[belowthelaw57]

Does anyone know if the "released answers" to essay questions in our NYT book are average, superior, or something else altogether? I've done above average on all my Barbri essays, but am finding a lot of the released answers to be very good--often significantly better than what I wrote in the essays Barbri graded. Does anyone know how good the "released answers" are vis-a-vis where we should be?

According to bar exam website's disclaimer (which is the same as in NYT--and the examinee answers are the same)--

The following are sample candidate answers that received scores superior to the average
scale score awarded for the relevant essay They have been reprinted without change,
except for minor editing. These essays should not be viewed as "model" answers, and
they do not, in all respects, accurately reflect New York State law and/or its application
to the facts. These answers are intended to demonstrate the general length and quality of
responses that earned above average scores on the indicated administration of the bar
examination. These answers are not intended to be used as a means of learning the law
tested on the examination, and their use for such a purpose is strongly discouraged.

[TrustMeI'mAnActress]

Can someone please clarify what contract damages are for construction contracts? I'm having trouble calculating -- mainly when owner breaches vs. when builder breaches and some performance has already been completed. Thanks!

[thetashster]

Can someone please clarify what contract damages are for construction contracts? I'm having trouble calculating -- mainly when owner breaches vs. when builder breaches and some performance has already been completed. Thanks!

I believe if the owner of the property or whatever breaches before any prep has been made, the contractor/construction company gets expectation damages (ie the profit he would have made). If prep had been done, contractor/construction company can also get reliance damages.

If the contractor/construction worker breaches, the owner gets:

(Contract price) minus ((Sums paid on account by Owner to Contractor) plus (Sums paid or owed by Owner to Replacement))
($200,000 contract price) − ($120,000 paid by Owner to Contractor + $140,000 paid by Owner to Substitute)
= ($200,000) − ($260,000)
= − $60,000 (i.e., $60,000 loss recoverable by Owner from Contractor)

If contractor does a shitty job, owner can get damages to cover remedying the problem.

[thetashster]

I know it got mentioned earlier, but I'm actually sort of alarmed at how many times "notice of alibi" is an issue in the essays. There was nothing at all in the lecture about this.

Why am I paranoid I'm gonna forget something?

Pencils
Exam ticket
ID
Computer

That's it right?

Clothes. Wear them.

With regard to the "quiet" snack we're allowed, does that mean I can actually eat during the test? I'm a stress eater.

yes but probably nothing with a loud wrapper or something super crunchy or that makes you slurp lots

[thetashster]

Does anyone know if we can bring a pencil sharpener to the exam? It is not mentioned as either something allowed or not.

no pencil sharpeners!

[Guchster]

Can someone please clarify what contract damages are for construction contracts? I'm having trouble calculating -- mainly when owner breaches vs. when builder breaches and some performance has already been completed. Thanks!

Easiest to break it down:

Builder breaches
Before Construction: Cost of completion + reasonable expenses for delay
During Construction: Cost of completion + reasonable expenses for delay (in the case that economic waste would occur by restarting construction, get what buyer would've have received minus what he actually received)
After Construction (late delay): Owner gets damages for loss incurred by late readiness (if that can't be determined interest on the building).

Owner breaches
Before Construction: Builder gets profits he would've received under the contract
During Construction: Builder gets profits from K plus any expenses put into the project
After Construction: Builder gets contract price plus interest for delay in payment


ETA: Just read Tash's and that's a really good summary of this little checklist tree.

[Guchster]

I'm a little confused with attorney advertising

For ads with a disclaimer: "Prior results do not guarantee a similar outcome,” what exactly can you include if you want to put in "testimonials and endorsements" and statements characterizing quality of the firm?

These statements need to be balanced with creating a misleading truth, right? So if my ad says "I NEVER LOST A CASE!" that technically might fall within what's permitted with that but it might be misleading?