2015 February California Bar Exam Forum

[arizzle]

Totally the same. I went into Essays thinking, ok, just hoping for a pass, and walked out feeling pretty decent. Went into the MBE thinking "this is my strength!" and walked out wanting to self-immolate... (er, wait, that's what just happened during the test...)

This.

[SpAcEmAn SpLiFF]

I thought the morning session was ok, but afternoon session was ROUGH

[Elms]

Totally the same. I went into Essays thinking, ok, just hoping for a pass, and walked out feeling pretty decent. Went into the MBE thinking "this is my strength!" and walked out wanting to self-immolate... (er, wait, that's what just happened during the test...)

This.

Yup... Meeeee too.

I did 1500 real past practice questions and was feeling reasonably confident hat I knew answers on most. My scores were averaging 75-80%. I've passed the MBE in a previous jurisdiction's test.

And today was a total clusterfuck.

[Biotech]

All the civ pro mbe's felt like a crap shoot, clearly I didn't study the subject well enough. The rest seemed easier to understand than last July. There were a handful I had no idea. Hoping they were experimental

The PT - totally messed up the advice/follow client instructions section. Went with inter pleader as the best option. Thankful the headings were provided. I didn't bring in any outside law.

I structured the first essay by possible breach, not by individual. Thinking that was not a good approach even though it made sense to me at the time.

I know I missed issues in the second one.

I truly had no idea about the last call in the third essay - I just said what I thought would be fair.

[melvinIII]

In addition to the high likelihood of professional responsibility tomorrow, what do you all think about the possibility for remedies (or remedies hybrid) tomorrow? I think remedies has been tested the last 4 bar exams.

Contract remedies were already tested on Tuesday but Tort remedies might pop up. Since there were no CA law essays on Tuesday I'm assuming there will be at least two tomorrow, which means evidence and CP/wills are highly likely.

[dueprocess14]

The MBEs were super hard! I actually am pretty sure that we were not supposed to use PR on the PT though. I think they might have been trying to tempt us to go there but they were trying to see who would follow directions. At least that's what I'm hoping because I really don't feel like there was enough law in the library for all the subjects they wanted addressed.

Anybody have predictions on what percentage of those MBEs were pretty shaky? I'd say like, 70%. Seriously. I probably was only confident on 30% and complete shots in the dark on 10%.

Agree with all of this. I really didn't think we were supposed to apply real ABA/CA rules to this, so if we were, I am even more effed than I thought.

Totally the same. I went into Essays thinking, ok, just hoping for a pass, and walked out feeling pretty decent. Went into the MBE thinking "this is my strength!" and walked out wanting to self-immolate... (er, wait, that's what just happened during the test...)

This.

Yup... Meeeee too.

I did 1500 real past practice questions and was feeling reasonably confident hat I knew answers on most. My scores were averaging 75-80%. I've passed the MBE in a previous jurisdiction's test.

And today was a total clusterfuck.

At least most people seem to have felt this way. Since they scale it in part based on the curve set by test takers, perhaps the scale will be more lenient? That's basically my only solace right now and the only way I can justify showing up and giving it my all tomorrow!

[elijah54594]

So I thought the essays and PT yesterday were easier than expected. I thought the MBE today was 10 times harder than expected.

Who's with me?

The morning was alright. The afternoon was a fucking gong show. WTF was up with all that?! I mean, I thought I got stuff right, but I wasn't sure most of the time.... holy balls

[Judge Philip Banks]

What contract remedies were tested on the Tues essay besides damages? I know the call of the question asked specifically for damages. I think I threw some non-legal remedies in there, too, but I'm guessing I missed some shit...

[mhub172]

That MBE was some serious bullshit.

I think this MBE was better than July but yes, agree with this. I feel like some of the questions cross over. I swear I saw one that I didn't know if it was testing criminal or con or both!!

I'm thinking PR tomorrow for sure. Also some CA subjects

[SpAcEmAn SpLiFF]

Quick question:
I'm looking over the Barbri PTs and there's one that asks for a two-column chart analyzing facts for an opposition to a summary judgment motion. Is there an easy way to do this two-column thing on Softtest?

[ringdabell]

On the PT, just wondering if it is OK to write in your real/actual name in the answer?

[Judge Philip Banks]

On the PT, just wondering if it is OK to write in your real/actual name in the answer?

No, it is not.

[ringdabell]

On the PT, just wondering if it is OK to write in your real/actual name in the answer?

No, it is not.

shit. really? uh is there penalty for that?

[SpAcEmAn SpLiFF]

On the PT, just wondering if it is OK to write in your real/actual name in the answer?

No, it is not.

shit. really? uh is there penalty for that?

i specifically recall the proctor reading instructions saying that you're not allowed to make any attempt to identify yourself on the written portions of the exam

[melvinIII]

What contract remedies were tested on the Tues essay besides damages? I know the call of the question asked specifically for damages. I think I threw some non-legal remedies in there, too, but I'm guessing I missed some shit...

As far as I can remember it was just expectation/consequential damages. I think I also quickly mentioned that punitive/restitution didn't apply.

On the PT, just wondering if it is OK to write in your real/actual name in the answer?

No, you're not supposed to identify yourself in any way. They'll probably redact it.

[Judge Philip Banks]

On the PT, just wondering if it is OK to write in your real/actual name in the answer?

No, it is not.

shit. really? uh is there penalty for that?

Don't know, but I'd be surprised if there is a penalty. I would imagine plenty of people do it.

[ringdabell]

On the PT, just wondering if it is OK to write in your real/actual name in the answer?

No, it is not.

shit. really? uh is there penalty for that?

Don't know, but I'd be surprised if there is a penalty. I would imagine plenty of people do it.

i don't recall hearing the instruction. i don't know why.
i have been googling on a related topic and couldn't find any.
ahhh im now worried sigh i really hope its immaterial.

[CourtneyElizabeth]

All the civ pro mbe's felt like a crap shoot, clearly I didn't study the subject well enough. The rest seemed easier to understand than last July. There were a handful I had no idea. Hoping they were experimental

The PT - totally messed up the advice/follow client instructions section. Went with inter pleader as the best option. Thankful the headings were provided. I didn't bring in any outside law.

I structured the first essay by possible breach, not by individual. Thinking that was not a good approach even though it made sense to me at the time.

I know I missed issues in the second one.

I truly had no idea about the last call in the third essay - I just said what I thought would be fair.

I said interpleader but qualified it by saying something like I know that's not what he wants to do but it might be our best bet. We can't sit around with our thumbs up our asses waiting to be sued. Sucks he will be embarrassed but tough shit.
Basically.

[CourtneyElizabeth]

On the PT, just wondering if it is OK to write in your real/actual name in the answer?

No, it is not.[/quote]

shit. really? uh is there penalty for that?[/quote]
Don't know, but I'd be surprised if there is a penalty. I would imagine plenty of people do it.[/quote]

i don't recall hearing the instruction. i don't know why.
i have been googling on a related topic and couldn't find any.
ahhh im now worried sigh i really hope its immaterial. [/quote]

I don't know how they can take points away but I know they're not gonna be psyched you put your name on something that's supposed to be anonymously graded.

[dueprocess14]

I don't know how they can take points away but I know they're not gonna be psyched you put your name on something that's supposed to be anonymously graded.

I think that's right. I remember hearing something about this too during the instructions, and thinking it was kind of funny that they even cared if we put our names on it... after all, what possible difference could it make? It's not like I know any of the graders, or vice versa. It was one thing in law school, where the professors knew the students well enough to form biases, but I can't imagine it's a "material breach."

[Elms]

At least most people seem to have felt this way. Since they scale it in part based on the curve set by test takers, perhaps the scale will be more lenient? That's basically my only solace right now and the only way I can justify showing up and giving it my all tomorrow!

I hope so! I still don't under how scaled/curved scoring works (math and all that or WHATEVER), but I am just telling myself it will help.

[ringdabell]

I don't know how they can take points away but I know they're not gonna be psyched you put your name on something that's supposed to be anonymously graded.

I think that's right. I remember hearing something about this too during the instructions, and thinking it was kind of funny that they even cared if we put our names on it... after all, what possible difference could it make? It's not like I know any of the graders, or vice versa. It was one thing in law school, where the professors knew the students well enough to form biases, but I can't imagine it's a "material breach."

So I guess the instruction didn't mention any consequences or any sort ?
Urgh. I don't see any written rules on the bar examiner website. so i hope this is ok. ahh i am super worried now

[Judge Philip Banks]

I don't know how they can take points away but I know they're not gonna be psyched you put your name on something that's supposed to be anonymously graded.

I think that's right. I remember hearing something about this too during the instructions, and thinking it was kind of funny that they even cared if we put our names on it... after all, what possible difference could it make? It's not like I know any of the graders, or vice versa. It was one thing in law school, where the professors knew the students well enough to form biases, but I can't imagine it's a "material breach."

So I guess the instruction didn't mention any consequences or any sort ?
Urgh. I don't see any written rules on the bar examiner website. so i hope this is ok. ahh i am super worried now

Don't trip. It's not a huge deal. Just shift your focus to tomorrow.

[calbarexamftw]

All the civ pro mbe's felt like a crap shoot, clearly I didn't study the subject well enough. The rest seemed easier to understand than last July. There were a handful I had no idea. Hoping they were experimental

The PT - totally messed up the advice/follow client instructions section. Went with inter pleader as the best option. Thankful the headings were provided. I didn't bring in any outside law.

I structured the first essay by possible breach, not by individual. Thinking that was not a good approach even though it made sense to me at the time.

I know I missed issues in the second one.

I truly had no idea about the last call in the third essay - I just said what I thought would be fair.

I said interpleader but qualified it by saying something like I know that's not what he wants to do but it might be our best bet. We can't sit around with our thumbs up our asses waiting to be sued. Sucks he will be embarrassed but tough shit.
Basically.

What's wrong w/ the interpleader?

[melvinIII]

In CA do all contingency agreements need to be in writing? or only if they are worth more than $1,000?