February 2015 Bar Exam Forum

[sparty99]

Pffft. I guess you didn't do any of the Themis exams. They go into great detail on the rule statements and then rehash even the most obvious facts when applying the analysis.

I mean you *can* write 3,800 words. Why not give a counter-argument for every argument, but you shouldn't because most people, except for this person apparently cannot write 3,800 words in 30 minutes.[/quote]

Its not about giving counter-arguments for every argument. It's about going beyond conclusory statements. I can say that An agent binds the principal through actual or apparent authority. I can stop there. Or like Themis taught me, I would go further and say that actual authority can be express or implied. Express authority exists based on words, statements, etc. Implied authority is ____. Apparent authority is ______. A prinicpal is not bound, however, if the agent is a contractor. Courts decide if they are a contractor by looking at the following factors: .......Then you would also might list that the principal can be bound by the acts of a contractor under limited circumstances.

It was also pretty easy to write over 3,800 words on the MPT.

[sparty99]

In my state I just have to be in the top 20%. On the other hand, 96% from my school pass the MN bar sooo I know it's relatively likely I failed. I just don't feel good about this thing though.

Whoever mentioned free time above nailed it. This is fucking awesome.

I kind of don't know what to do with all the free time. Feel like I should be studying. Summer is imminent so maybe working out twice a day.

[minnbills]

Pffft. I guess you didn't do any of the Themis exams. They go into great detail on the rule statements and then rehash even the most obvious facts when applying the analysis.

I mean you *can* write 3,800 words. Why not give a counter-argument for every argument, but you shouldn't because most people, except for this person apparently cannot write 3,800 words in 30 minutes.

Its not about giving counter-arguments for every argument. It's about going beyond conclusory statements. I can say that An agent binds the principal through actual or apparent authority. I can stop there. Or like Themis taught me, I would go further and say that actual authority can be express or implied. Express authority exists based on words, statements, etc. Implied authority is ____. Apparent authority is ______. A prinicpal is not bound, however, if the agent is a contractor. Courts decide if they are a contractor by looking at the following factors: .......Then you would also might list that the principal can be bound by the acts of a contractor under limited circumstances.

It was also pretty easy to write over 3,800 words on the MPT.[/quote]

That's not counter-arguments, it's just explaining the law.

I hardly had enough time to do a simple IRAC, definitely did not get any real counter-arguments into mine

[minnbills]

In my state I just have to be in the top 20%. On the other hand, 96% from my school pass the MN bar sooo I know it's relatively likely I failed. I just don't feel good about this thing though.

Whoever mentioned free time above nailed it. This is fucking awesome.

I kind of don't know what to do with all the free time. Feel like I should be studying. Summer is imminent so maybe working out twice a day.

I have a lot of skiing to keep me busy. I am reading and watching HOC too. Feels good to not be under the gun constantly

[Holly Golightly]

Yeah, I was super grouchy back at work on Thursday. Slightly less crabby on Friday.

I took Thursday off to do nothing/be hungover, but I should have taken Friday off, too. I'm still sick, lethargic, and braindead.

[waxecstatic]

Pffft. I guess you didn't do any of the Themis exams. They go into great detail on the rule statements and then rehash even the most obvious facts when applying the analysis.

I mean you *can* write 3,800 words. Why not give a counter-argument for every argument, but you shouldn't because most people, except for this person apparently cannot write 3,800 words in 30 minutes.

Its not about giving counter-arguments for every argument. It's about going beyond conclusory statements. I can say that An agent binds the principal through actual or apparent authority. I can stop there. Or like Themis taught me, I would go further and say that actual authority can be express or implied. Express authority exists based on words, statements, etc. Implied authority is ____. Apparent authority is ______. A prinicpal is not bound, however, if the agent is a contractor. Courts decide if they are a contractor by looking at the following factors: .......Then you would also might list that the principal can be bound by the acts of a contractor under limited circumstances.

It was also pretty easy to write over 3,800 words on the MPT.

That's not counter-arguments, it's just explaining the law.

I hardly had enough time to do a simple IRAC, definitely did not get any real counter-arguments into mine[/quote]

Yeah, why not have an argument about writing 3,800 words for a single essay on a minimum competency test. I just looked over some Themis answers. Not one answer was over 1,300 words. No idea where you are getting 3,800 from. And also, more important than anything else, why is it necessary to write that much if you don't have to? And how can you write 3,800 words in a half hour anyway, assuming you spent at least a minute to read the question.

[aquasalad]

Ya, everyone who wrote way less while still hitting everything is going to smoke someone writing 3500 words. LOL that is unnecessary

[46-and-2]

I'm getting hammied tonight and, will watch house of cards until I pass out. Glorious.

[YibanRen]

You guys saying you write 3500 words or whatever are crazy. I passed CA only writing like maybe 1000 words per essay max AND CA gives you twice as much time for each answer and they are twice as hard.

On the MEE you only need to write like six-nine paragraphs per question tops. That is like the maximum. Any more and you are being super wasteful with time. To pass you need like:

Each topic: Short introductory paragraph with issue and conclusion, paragraph two: lengthy rule statement that almost seems like a professor's rumination on the law, paragraph three: factual analysis addressing the most important aspects of the test/maybe like five seconds of equivocation, and a one sentence conclusion. You don't need to equivocate much because they pretty much give you the issues to spot.

Because you have six essays to write, any one of which may trip you up, it isn't feasible to write more per question.

[46-and-2]

You guys saying you write 3500 words or whatever are crazy. I passed CA only writing like maybe 1000 words per essay max AND CA gives you twice as much time for each answer and they are twice as hard.

On the MEE you only need to write like six-nine paragraphs per question tops. That is like the maximum. Any more and you are being super wasteful with time. To pass you need like:

Each topic: Short introductory paragraph with issue and conclusion, paragraph two: lengthy rule statement that almost seems like a professor's rumination on the law, paragraph three: factual analysis addressing the most important aspects of the test/maybe like five seconds of equivocation, and a one sentence conclusion. You don't need to equivocate much because they pretty much give you the issues to spot.

Because you have six essays to write, any one of which may trip you up, it isn't feasible to write more per question.

6-9 paragraphs per question? Lolololol

[sparty99]

You guys saying you write 3500 words or whatever are crazy. I passed CA only writing like maybe 1000 words per essay max AND CA gives you twice as much time for each answer and they are twice as hard.

On the MEE you only need to write like six-nine paragraphs per question tops. That is like the maximum. Any more and you are being super wasteful with time. To pass you need like:

Each topic: Short introductory paragraph with issue and conclusion, paragraph two: lengthy rule statement that almost seems like a professor's rumination on the law, paragraph three: factual analysis addressing the most important aspects of the test/maybe like five seconds of equivocation, and a one sentence conclusion. You don't need to equivocate much because they pretty much give you the issues to spot.

Because you have six essays to write, any one of which may trip you up, it isn't feasible to write more per question.

Whatever dude. If you know a topic really well where you can write 3,500 words then you going to write 3,500 words. It's best that you get the maximum points on a topic that you do know then wasting additional time on an area that you are weak on like secured transactions. When I write 3,500 words, I'm going for a 4 or 5 points on the essay.

[Holly Golightly]

Remembered how happy I am to be done and decided to go out and celebrate

[YibanRen]

You guys saying you write 3500 words or whatever are crazy. I passed CA only writing like maybe 1000 words per essay max AND CA gives you twice as much time for each answer and they are twice as hard.

On the MEE you only need to write like six-nine paragraphs per question tops. That is like the maximum. Any more and you are being super wasteful with time. To pass you need like:

Each topic: Short introductory paragraph with issue and conclusion, paragraph two: lengthy rule statement that almost seems like a professor's rumination on the law, paragraph three: factual analysis addressing the most important aspects of the test/maybe like five seconds of equivocation, and a one sentence conclusion. You don't need to equivocate much because they pretty much give you the issues to spot.

Because you have six essays to write, any one of which may trip you up, it isn't feasible to write more per question.

6-9 paragraphs per question? Lolololol

Did we take the same test? Did you take the MEE? I mean when I say paragraph, I mean a brick of a paragraph that is basically a "section," like 8-10 sentences max.

I mean, Barbri's model answers are about that length. Why would you write more than that? How do you write more than that in 15 minutes? These people saying "3500 words" would have to have been typing like 100 words per minute for the entire length of an essay. Do you read and type at the same time? Like, if you leave yourself 20 minutes to write the essay after jotting down a quick 10 min outline, and type at 50 wpm, you can get 1000 words max down. And, you probably stop to read over facts again. You probably can really get 900 words down max.

If every paragraph you write is like 6 sentences on average, that is like 150 words per paragraph. So, you realistically can get like 6-9 paragraphs down per essay.

I think you took a different test, or are lying.

[YibanRen]

You guys saying you write 3500 words or whatever are crazy. I passed CA only writing like maybe 1000 words per essay max AND CA gives you twice as much time for each answer and they are twice as hard.

On the MEE you only need to write like six-nine paragraphs per question tops. That is like the maximum. Any more and you are being super wasteful with time. To pass you need like:

Each topic: Short introductory paragraph with issue and conclusion, paragraph two: lengthy rule statement that almost seems like a professor's rumination on the law, paragraph three: factual analysis addressing the most important aspects of the test/maybe like five seconds of equivocation, and a one sentence conclusion. You don't need to equivocate much because they pretty much give you the issues to spot.

Because you have six essays to write, any one of which may trip you up, it isn't feasible to write more per question.

Whatever dude. If you know a topic really well where you can write 3,500 words then you going to write 3,500 words. It's best that you get the maximum points on a topic that you do know then wasting additional time on an area that you are weak on like secured transactions. When I write 3,500 words, I'm going for a 4 or 5 points on the essay.

Dude, if you wrote 3,500 words on an essay, you typed 116 wpm for the entire length of the thirty minutes and didn't read the prompt. Anything over 1000 words is impossible.

[sparty99]

You guys saying you write 3500 words or whatever are crazy. I passed CA only writing like maybe 1000 words per essay max AND CA gives you twice as much time for each answer and they are twice as hard.

On the MEE you only need to write like six-nine paragraphs per question tops. That is like the maximum. Any more and you are being super wasteful with time. To pass you need like:

Each topic: Short introductory paragraph with issue and conclusion, paragraph two: lengthy rule statement that almost seems like a professor's rumination on the law, paragraph three: factual analysis addressing the most important aspects of the test/maybe like five seconds of equivocation, and a one sentence conclusion. You don't need to equivocate much because they pretty much give you the issues to spot.

Because you have six essays to write, any one of which may trip you up, it isn't feasible to write more per question.

Whatever dude. If you know a topic really well where you can write 3,500 words then you going to write 3,500 words. It's best that you get the maximum points on a topic that you do know then wasting additional time on an area that you are weak on like secured transactions. When I write 3,500 words, I'm going for a 4 or 5 points on the essay.

Dude, if you wrote 3,500 words on an essay, you typed 116 wpm for the entire length of the thirty minutes and didn't read the prompt. Anything over 1000 words is impossible.

Okay. Well. Then I guess I typed 116 wpm because I definitely reached the word max and had to delete shit on the MPT. Also cited a case on one question.

[YibanRen]

You guys saying you write 3500 words or whatever are crazy. I passed CA only writing like maybe 1000 words per essay max AND CA gives you twice as much time for each answer and they are twice as hard.

On the MEE you only need to write like six-nine paragraphs per question tops. That is like the maximum. Any more and you are being super wasteful with time. To pass you need like:

Each topic: Short introductory paragraph with issue and conclusion, paragraph two: lengthy rule statement that almost seems like a professor's rumination on the law, paragraph three: factual analysis addressing the most important aspects of the test/maybe like five seconds of equivocation, and a one sentence conclusion. You don't need to equivocate much because they pretty much give you the issues to spot.

Because you have six essays to write, any one of which may trip you up, it isn't feasible to write more per question.

Whatever dude. If you know a topic really well where you can write 3,500 words then you going to write 3,500 words. It's best that you get the maximum points on a topic that you do know then wasting additional time on an area that you are weak on like secured transactions. When I write 3,500 words, I'm going for a 4 or 5 points on the essay.

Dude, if you wrote 3,500 words on an essay, you typed 116 wpm for the entire length of the thirty minutes and didn't read the prompt. Anything over 1000 words is impossible.

Okay. Well. Then I guess I typed 116 wpm because I definitely reached the word max and had to delete shit on the MPT. Also cited a case on one question.

My bad, I thought you were talking about an individual MEE essay. MPT 3000+ words seems really hard, but if you did so you and were on topic, you probably got an amazing score.

[Homiemomma]

Anyone in a UBE jurisdiction have any predictions on the MBE scale based on Barbri raw scores? I was 2% short in July, mostly because of the MBE. I know I did better on the February essays, but I wanted to cry after the MBE. I improved my Barbri scores 10-15% from July to February, but the July exam just freaking slaughtered my confidence.

I've made it through the initial wine-induced euphoria and now the score anxiety is kicking in. Also trying not to think about how I don't have a job.

[YibanRen]

Anyone in a UBE jurisdiction have any predictions on the MBE scale based on Barbri raw scores? I was 2% short in July, mostly because of the MBE. I know I did better on the February essays, but I wanted to cry after the MBE. I improved my Barbri scores 10-15% from July to February, but the July exam just freaking slaughtered my confidence.

I've made it through the initial wine-induced euphoria and now the score anxiety is kicking in. Also trying not to think about how I don't have a job.

I have no idea. I think it would be 12%? When I took it in CA, I think that was the curve according to some people.

[Jimothy]

Just curious to see how everyone is doing almost a week after the big event. I'm still having dreams about MBE questions.

[1234567888]

Just curious to see how everyone is doing almost a week after the big event. I'm still having dreams about MBE questions.

Any tips on forgetting about it for the next couple months? Trying to focus on work and stay busy...

[JoanSloan]

Trying to focus on work and stay busy...

Sounds about right.

[MichBar]

Does anyone even actually know how much the curve usually ads? The answer is usually 10-15 points but do we ever know what actual raw averages are per administration and what the scale is? Or is it just educated speculation? I've heard some curves are even more generous depending on the test.

[OklahomasOK]

Does anyone even actually know how much the curve usually ads? The answer is usually 10-15 points but do we ever know what actual raw averages are per administration and what the scale is? Or is it just educated speculation? I've heard some curves are even more generous depending on the test.

Now it's pure speculation. Each state is different. I'm not an expert on the MBE (who would be?) but I suspect July was heavily cured, in the nature of 15+ points. Usually it's around 10 points or so.

[seizmaar]

today we went to the food truck. my friend and i both wanted a drink but we had already used our cards, so i just told the dude i wanted 2 drinks and he said "$1" and i gave it to him. that price seemed too cheap to me but whatever. i grab my drink and my co-clerk grabs hers. she asks if i paid for hers and i tell her $.50 for a drink seemed too low but i think i got her. she got upset and went back to the truck to give them $1 for her drink, claiming i made her steal the drink.

she went to the truck and they said, no, $1 was right because my meal came with a drink. the next thoughts i had were 1) did i commit attempted larceny, and 2) is that legal or factual impossibility? i hate what this test has done to me.

[mouse89]

I don't have to study before and after work? WHOA

I'm stressed about the bar results, worried I won't find a job, etc. but I get to sleep in and watch tv. I will take this as a small win.