Barbri paced program question? Forum

[tsutsik]

Lol How in the world are we supposed to be able to keep covenants, equitable servitudes, and easements straight on exam day?

I mean, I know the difference now after reviewing but I'm not sure that in a fact pattern where someone migth or might not be allowed to do something on land that I would be able to pick among three answers where each is one of those three.

This is how I feel about priority rules in secured transactions. There's no way I'm going to recall that crap.

[encore1101]

Lol How in the world are we supposed to be able to keep covenants, equitable servitudes, and easements straight on exam day?

I mean, I know the difference now after reviewing but I'm not sure that in a fact pattern where someone migth or might not be allowed to do something on land that I would be able to pick among three answers where each is one of those three.

This is how I feel about priority rules in secured transactions. There's no way I'm going to recall that crap.

I remember it by thinking of it as 2 groups of 3, the winner's bracket and the loser's bracket:
The buyer always wins his bracket.

BiOC = Buyer
PAC = Did everything he was supposed to.
LC = not perfected and not attached, but has a court on his side

NOcie = Buyer, but not in the ordinary course of business.
AUpie = did one thing he was supposed to.
GUC = not perfected and not attached, and does not have court on his side.

[jd20132013]

amortization. what is it. getting conflicting reports. thought it was simply allowing a nonconforming user to gradually phase out the use of his property instead of having to do it all at once. critical pass cards suggest that it has to do with government paying the landowner.

halp

[encore1101]

amortization. what is it. getting conflicting reports. thought it was simply allowing a nonconforming user to gradually phase out the use of his property instead of having to do it all at once. critical pass cards suggest that it has to do with government paying the landowner.

halp

the former. the latter is condemnation in a "takings"

[UndecidedMN]

Unilateral Recession Question.

There was a sample MBE question, but I do not remember the answer, just the question.

So a general contractor puts out bids to subcontractor so he can bid on a building. A subcontractor who he has used many times before bids 10,000 for the electrical work. The general contractor uses the bid in his overall bid and wins the contract. Next day the sub calls the general and says, I made a mistake the bid should have been for 11,000, can you please use someone else because I will lose money. The general says, "because I have used you many times before, I will forget you sent the bid". Now if I remember correctly, unilateral mistake is not forgiven unless there is a sufficient reason or the other party should have known. That isn't happening here. I thought the MBE answer was crap to because I thought it said the general can still sue the sub. It is not a mutual rescission because there is no consideration by the sub because he is not giving anything to get off the hook besides saying please.

Can someone explain?

[Sandro]

I just had that question and thought it was utterly ridiculous - wasn't the answer that the contract could be validly rescinded/forgive the obligation as a "gift" to the person ?

Was that even covered in the Barbri lecture?

[mvpforme]

Unilateral Recession Question.

There was a sample MBE question, but I do not remember the answer, just the question.

So a general contractor puts out bids to subcontractor so he can bid on a building. A subcontractor who he has used many times before bids 10,000 for the electrical work. The general contractor uses the bid in his overall bid and wins the contract. Next day the sub calls the general and says, I made a mistake the bid should have been for 11,000, can you please use someone else because I will lose money. The general says, "because I have used you many times before, I will forget you sent the bid". Now if I remember correctly, unilateral mistake is not forgiven unless there is a sufficient reason or the other party should have known. That isn't happening here. I thought the MBE answer was crap to because I thought it said the general can still sue the sub. It is not a mutual rescission because there is no consideration by the sub because he is not giving anything to get off the hook besides saying please.

Can someone explain?

Is there more to the question? Other bids, reliance by the sub?

[ditch digger]

Lol How in the world are we supposed to be able to keep covenants, equitable servitudes, and easements straight on exam day?

I mean, I know the difference now after reviewing but I'm not sure that in a fact pattern where someone migth or might not be allowed to do something on land that I would be able to pick among three answers where each is one of those three.

This is how I feel about priority rules in secured transactions. There's no way I'm going to recall that crap.

I remember it by thinking of it as 2 groups of 3, the winner's bracket and the loser's bracket:
The buyer always wins his bracket.

BiOC = Buyer
PAC = Did everything he was supposed to.
LC = not perfected and not attached, but has a court on his side

NOcie = Buyer, but not in the ordinary course of business.
AUpie = did one thing he was supposed to.
GUC = not perfected and not attached, and does not have court on his side.

That's a bit helpful Did I get this right?

BiOC = buyer in the ordinary course?
PAC = perfected attached secured creditor?
LC = lien creditor?

NOcie = buyer not in the ordinary course?
AUpie = attached unperfected secured creditor?
GUC = general unsecured creditor?

[encore1101]

Lol How in the world are we supposed to be able to keep covenants, equitable servitudes, and easements straight on exam day?

I mean, I know the difference now after reviewing but I'm not sure that in a fact pattern where someone migth or might not be allowed to do something on land that I would be able to pick among three answers where each is one of those three.

This is how I feel about priority rules in secured transactions. There's no way I'm going to recall that crap.

I remember it by thinking of it as 2 groups of 3, the winner's bracket and the loser's bracket:
The buyer always wins his bracket.

BiOC = Buyer
PAC = Did everything he was supposed to.
LC = not perfected and not attached, but has a court on his side

NOcie = Buyer, but not in the ordinary course of business.
AUpie = did one thing he was supposed to.
GUC = not perfected and not attached, and does not have court on his side.

That's a bit helpful Did I get this right?

BiOC = buyer in the ordinary course?
PAC = perfected attached secured creditor?
LC = lien creditor?

NOcie = buyer not in the ordinary course?
AUpie = attached unperfected secured creditor?
GUC = general unsecured creditor?

yep, perfect. think of it as the winner's/loser's bracket, or dr jekyll and mr. hyde

BiOC's counterpart = buyer NOT in the ordinary course.
PAC counterpart = Unperfect attached creditor
Opposite of the guy who went to court but has nothing else? the guy who didn't go to court.

[jd20132013]

encore you are going to crush this exam

this is like the thid time I've seen you explain something in a better way than the materials


general psa: go to bed early tonight guys. better to be well rested so you can remember what you do know than spend an extra two hours trying to cram stuff. everyone in here has enough in their heads to pass, its just a matter of remembering it

[encore1101]

encore you are going to crush this exam

this is like the thid time I've seen you explain something in a better way than the materials


general psa: go to bed early tonight guys. better to be well rested so you can remember what you do know than spend an extra two hours trying to cram stuff. everyone in here has enough in their heads to pass, its just a matter of remembering it

Hahaha, thanks, but all I want is "passed."

[jd20132013]

looks like despite basically saying screw Barbri's program i'm going to get to around 68 or 69%.

not bad, I think

[beachbum]

Today is the first time I've actually woken up nervous for the bar. Like, eyes popped open and first thought was "holy shit it's almost here."

Also, my dog has been getting sick the past few days. I think he's feeding off my nervous energy.

[huntington]

So, I've been following the paced program, only a couple percentage points behind on the progress bar.


I did (slightly) above average on the simulated and the MBE won't KILL me.


However, I have realized that I can't articulate a single standard. I know everything enough ~generally~ to say "oh that can't be right" or "oh, that's clearly okay" but that's about it.


I am FUCKED for the essays.

What have I been doing all summer?

[july14bar]

So, I've been following the paced program, only a couple percentage points behind on the progress bar.


I did (slightly) above average on the simulated and the MBE won't KILL me.


However, I have realized that I can't articulate a single standard. I know everything enough ~generally~ to say "oh that can't be right" or "oh, that's clearly okay" but that's about it.


I am FUCKED for the essays.

What have I been doing all summer?

If I look at a flash card that says "adverse possession," I may not be able to just rattle off the elements. But when I look at the fact pattern and it says "Billy lived on the property for all but one year, when he left to take care of his dying father in Texas," it signals to my brain that one of the elements is "continuosity." Gotta discern clues from the facts they provide. Every once in a while, there will be an essay or subpart that asks about an issue without providing relevant facts and you have to remember the BLL cold and make presumption. But usually, they'll provide facts that hint at some/all of the elements.

[huntington]

So, I've been following the paced program, only a couple percentage points behind on the progress bar.


I did (slightly) above average on the simulated and the MBE won't KILL me.


However, I have realized that I can't articulate a single standard. I know everything enough ~generally~ to say "oh that can't be right" or "oh, that's clearly okay" but that's about it.


I am FUCKED for the essays.

What have I been doing all summer?

If I look at a flash card that says "adverse possession," I may not be able to just rattle off the elements. But when I look at the fact pattern and it says "Billy lived on the property for all but one year, when he left to take care of his dying father in Texas," it signals to my brain that one of the elements is "continuosity." Gotta discern clues from the facts they provide. Every once in a while, there will be an essay or subpart that asks about an issue without providing relevant facts and you have to remember the BLL cold and make presumption. But usually, they'll provide facts that hint at some/all of the elements.

That's true, I didn't really think about it that way. The MBE is fine because it triggers the elements in your head and gives you the answer.


I definitely will look to deconstruct the elements from the essays.

[jd20132013]

Question: So, between merchants under the uCC, an acceptance with additional terms. They become part of the K unless they materially change the offer or offeror objects.

What if just one party is a merchant? Is it mirror image rule or is it the UCC additional terms rule?

[LouEVille]

A K is still formed, but you just disregard the additional term.

[Sandro]

So, I've been following the paced program, only a couple percentage points behind on the progress bar.


I did (slightly) above average on the simulated and the MBE won't KILL me.


However, I have realized that I can't articulate a single standard. I know everything enough ~generally~ to say "oh that can't be right" or "oh, that's clearly okay" but that's about it.


I am FUCKED for the essays.

What have I been doing all summer?

Same - I can go through the model answers and nail 100% of the issues but as far as stating the rule... You just have to figure there's a lot of people in the same boat, a lot of people who won't even get the issues, and its not like a law school exam where you have to write out 25 pages - these model answers give 2-3 paragraphs at most for each question.

[Gators23]

MPQ 2 mixed set 3 - nightmare relative to anyone else's performance on the others?

[UndecidedMN]

MEE Corps, Question 6. FML. He was right about proxies but I had no fucking clue. The MBCA was not even mentioned in the Barbri lecture. I threw shit against the wall, hope it stuck.

I wonder seriously if the MEE writers looked at the Barbri lectures and tried to find shit they never talked about. I know almost none of Question 4 in Civ Pro and Question 6 Corps stuff was never in the lecture notes.

[Flips88]

MEE Corps, Question 6. FML. He was right about proxies but I had no fucking clue. The MBCA was not even mentioned in the Barbri lecture. I threw shit against the wall, hope it stuck.

Yep. I just made everything up and was probably wrong, but you know #YOLO.

[Georgia Avenue]

MEE Corps, Question 6. FML. He was right about proxies but I had no fucking clue. The MBCA was not even mentioned in the Barbri lecture. I threw shit against the wall, hope it stuck.

Yep. I just made everything up and was probably wrong, but you know #YOLO.

Everyone did.

[beachbum]

MEE Corps, Question 6. FML. He was right about proxies but I had no fucking clue. The MBCA was not even mentioned in the Barbri lecture. I threw shit against the wall, hope it stuck.

Yep. I just made everything up and was probably wrong, but you know #YOLO.

Everyone did.

Yup.

[ditch digger]

MEE Corps, Question 6. FML. He was right about proxies but I had no fucking clue. The MBCA was not even mentioned in the Barbri lecture. I threw shit against the wall, hope it stuck.

Yep. I just made everything up and was probably wrong, but you know #YOLO.

Everyone did.

Yup.

That question sucked ass. I'm glad I'm not the only one who had trouble with it. Damnit Professor Freer, I want my money back!