California Bar Exam (July 2014) thread Forum

[JohnnyBeagle]

I didn't think the PT was too bad

thoroughly depressed I ran out of time on the PR/Business essay and didn't even mention 10b5

whatever, 2 more day to kill it

[AguasAguas!]

Friend on the east coast says ExamSoft told her on the phone they are "down" until 10 PM ET/7 PT. I got an email saying I need to manually upload the website is not working.

Also, yes fuck the PT and fuck essay 3.

[pkt63]

I think the website is just busy with uploading thousands of people's tests. Mine also told me I was not connected a couple of times, but now it shows signs of actually uploading. I uploaded at lunch without a problem, much quicker, so that's my assumption.

[chicoalto0649]

For 3rd question, how is it 10b(5) issue. I thought there's no private cause of action?

[rhinofinger]

anybody know when the model answers are posted to the state bar's website? is it not until scores in November? or earlier?

The model answers for the February 2014 exam were posted sometime late June or early July, after the scores were released in mid-May. The LA Daily Journal releases their own model answers on the day the scores are released, though, if you can get ahold of a copy.

[adonai]

Was that last one a triple crossover with partnership, corps, and pr? Or did I write a bunch of nonsense

Yes that's how I treated it. It was like vague PR stuff, 10b-5 and authority/LLP stuff... At least that's what I wrote about!

\
That's basically what I talked about but in a somewhat general way. I ran out of time. I did the question in 45 minutes. I rob Peter to pay Paul and used more time on the evidence question. Oh well. I though the pr part was a little confusing,even though I put a bunch of stuff down.

This is exactly what I did. Evidence is always a race horse and I gave in. The pt bit was rrally weird too. I felt it hit on a lot of the small obscure rules rather than big picture duties

[adonai]

For 3rd question, how is it 10b(5) issue. I thought there's no private cause of action?

Misappropriation theory. A and S were in duty of trust and confidence as lawyer client.

[FutureInLaw]

I thought the first part of the PT was weird...not sure if I approached it the right away? It seemed subtle (to me at least), especially compared to the second part.

I was so confused by essay 3 but think I approached it the right way? Put in a potpourri of PR, 10b-5, and LLP law.

And essay 1 -- I literally laughed out loud when I saw remedies. My worst topic. Think I maybe handled it well. Who the hell knows.

[usctoucla]

examsoft not working for me either. had to force quit and both uploads failed. trying to do it manually now but i think examsoft's website is slammed.

completely blew the remedies question. panicked. evidence was very easy, and the PR is a toss-up. Not really a single BLL rule to put down. Praying for 2 60's and a 65. Mayyybe a 70 on evidence but aren't scores like that reserved only for the Gods?

[pkt63]

My PT was, I think (but really don't know) an organizational disaster. I kept coming up with stuff long after my pathetic outline and kept just adding it in, like "additionally…"

Remedies Q - not that it REALLY matters, but did you guys say specific performance was available or not? I had some doubts about the feasibility but ultimately said it was feasible to enforce because just requires her to let him go on his land for 100+ more hours, which is more than just exchanging property but less than involuntary servitude.

PR was so flimsy. Duty of competence, to uphold law, to expedite cases, confidentiality and not even a meaty loyalty question. I tried to throw in the CA distinctions on confidentiality and competence, but they all felt flimsy and weak.

I guess evidence was ok, but I thought it was heavier on hearsay than I expected. Just a little impeachment and maybe throw in some authentication/best evidence whatever and of course relevance, but it was so much hearsay!

[FutureInLaw]

So--are we done with any of these subjects for Thursday? I would only guarantee no Evidence or strict Remedies. But I'm not sure about Contracts, Remedies mixed with Torts, PR (feel like we could get another crossover), or Business Associations (though probably not).

[FutureInLaw]

My PT was, I think (but really don't know) an organizational disaster. I kept coming up with stuff long after my pathetic outline and kept just adding it in, like "additionally…"

Remedies Q - not that it REALLY matters, but did you guys say specific performance was available or not? I had some doubts about the feasibility but ultimately said it was feasible to enforce because just requires her to let him go on his land for 100+ more hours, which is more than just exchanging property but less than involuntary servitude.

PR was so flimsy. Duty of competence, to uphold law, to expedite cases, confidentiality and not even a meaty loyalty question. I tried to throw in the CA distinctions on confidentiality and competence, but they all felt flimsy and weak.

I guess evidence was ok, but I thought it was heavier on hearsay than I expected. Just a little impeachment and maybe throw in some authentication/best evidence whatever and of course relevance, but it was so much hearsay!

EDIT: Forgot we're not supposed to talk answers, I think.

[jarofsoup]

For 3rd question, how is it 10b(5) issue. I thought there's no private cause of action?

There is an implied private right of action under rule 10b-5. I know this because I spent the last two years focusing on securities law.

[pkt63]

My PT was, I think (but really don't know) an organizational disaster. I kept coming up with stuff long after my pathetic outline and kept just adding it in, like "additionally…"

Remedies Q - not that it REALLY matters, but did you guys say specific performance was available or not? I had some doubts about the feasibility but ultimately said it was feasible to enforce because just requires her to let him go on his land for 100+ more hours, which is more than just exchanging property but less than involuntary servitude.

PR was so flimsy. Duty of competence, to uphold law, to expedite cases, confidentiality and not even a meaty loyalty question. I tried to throw in the CA distinctions on confidentiality and competence, but they all felt flimsy and weak.

I guess evidence was ok, but I thought it was heavier on hearsay than I expected. Just a little impeachment and maybe throw in some authentication/best evidence whatever and of course relevance, but it was so much hearsay!

EDIT: Forgot we're not supposed to talk answers, I think.

Wait so what's the standard? I read the sticky in the forum but it's vague. We can discuss the questions but not how we answered them? Is what I wrote different than all the discussion about 10b-5 right now?

[PMan99]

examsoft not working for me either. had to force quit and both uploads failed. trying to do it manually now but i think examsoft's website is slammed.

completely blew the remedies question. panicked. evidence was very easy, and the PR is a toss-up. Not really a single BLL rule to put down. Praying for 2 60's and a 65. Mayyybe a 70 on evidence but aren't scores like that reserved only for the Gods?

There is a lot of information and misinformation out there about essay grades, but given that a 65 is the pass line (for takers, not graders) you can be fairly certain there are a lot of 70s to be given out.

[dtl]

My PT was, I think (but really don't know) an organizational disaster. I kept coming up with stuff long after my pathetic outline and kept just adding it in, like "additionally…"

Remedies Q - not that it REALLY matters, but did you guys say specific performance was available or not? I had some doubts about the feasibility but ultimately said it was feasible to enforce because just requires her to let him go on his land for 100+ more hours, which is more than just exchanging property but less than involuntary servitude.

PR was so flimsy. Duty of competence, to uphold law, to expedite cases, confidentiality and not even a meaty loyalty question. I tried to throw in the CA distinctions on confidentiality and competence, but they all felt flimsy and weak.

I guess evidence was ok, but I thought it was heavier on hearsay than I expected. Just a little impeachment and maybe throw in some authentication/best evidence whatever and of course relevance, but it was so much hearsay!

EDIT: Forgot we're not supposed to talk answers, I think.

Is this true because I totally need to hash over what the hell I should have wrote with someone else.

Remedies I thought was generally straight forward, although I did not expect a pure remedies to show up. The evidence was heavy on hearsay, but I think I got through most of it. The last question, who the hell knows, I did not have enough time. I felt like the duties and the issues did not line up right, but I kept vomiting duties on the page and forcing them to line up even if askew.

Thank god I reviewed 10b-5 last night before bed. Fuck you, securities law.

Also - was that PT hard to organize for everyone else? The second part lent itself to good headings, but the first part was just a blob, a blob in the blob, and a conclusion blob for me.

[adonai]

My PT was, I think (but really don't know) an organizational disaster. I kept coming up with stuff long after my pathetic outline and kept just adding it in, like "additionally…"

Remedies Q - not that it REALLY matters, but did you guys say specific performance was available or not? I had some doubts about the feasibility but ultimately said it was feasible to enforce because just requires her to let him go on his land for 100+ more hours, which is more than just exchanging property but less than involuntary servitude.

PR was so flimsy. Duty of competence, to uphold law, to expedite cases, confidentiality and not even a meaty loyalty question. I tried to throw in the CA distinctions on confidentiality and competence, but they all felt flimsy and weak.

I guess evidence was ok, but I thought it was heavier on hearsay than I expected. Just a little impeachment and maybe throw in some authentication/best evidence whatever and of course relevance, but it was so much hearsay!

EDIT: Forgot we're not supposed to talk answers, I think.

Is this true because I totally need to hash over what the hell I should have wrote with someone else.

Remedies I thought was generally straight forward, although I did not expect a pure remedies to show up. The evidence was heavy on hearsay, but I think I got through most of it. The last question, who the hell knows, I did not have enough time. I felt like the duties and the issues did not line up right, but I kept vomiting duties on the page and forcing them to line up even if askew.

Thank god I reviewed 10b-5 last night before bed. Fuck you, securities law.

Also - was that PT hard to organize for everyone else? The second part lent itself to good headings, but the first part was just a blob, a blob in the blob, and a conclusion blob for me.

You're not alone. Organization was also hard for me. I think the examiners upped the ante with that as a result of making it relatively short.

[Anonnn]

Remedies was fine.

PR/Securities/Partnership was fine/ok (Called 10b-5 "15b" on accident but got the substance mostly right so hopefully will get enough points for that)

PT was fine but SO MUCH WRITING AND SO MANY FACTS TO COVER. Got a little muddled on the second issue but probably still did well/fine.

Evidence was no bueno. I don't know if I just blanked or what but definitely could've done better on that. Kind of threw everything I could think of at it but know that I misstated 1-2 of the exceptions but what are you going to do. Think I couldn't get my mind off CA evidence so I got the two kind of mixed up.

On the whole Day 1 was ok. Anticipated having one essay that kind of thwomped me but pleased that remedies went better than expected (I hope!).

[pkt63]

My PT was, I think (but really don't know) an organizational disaster. I kept coming up with stuff long after my pathetic outline and kept just adding it in, like "additionally…"

Remedies Q - not that it REALLY matters, but did you guys say specific performance was available or not? I had some doubts about the feasibility but ultimately said it was feasible to enforce because just requires her to let him go on his land for 100+ more hours, which is more than just exchanging property but less than involuntary servitude.

PR was so flimsy. Duty of competence, to uphold law, to expedite cases, confidentiality and not even a meaty loyalty question. I tried to throw in the CA distinctions on confidentiality and competence, but they all felt flimsy and weak.

I guess evidence was ok, but I thought it was heavier on hearsay than I expected. Just a little impeachment and maybe throw in some authentication/best evidence whatever and of course relevance, but it was so much hearsay!

EDIT: Forgot we're not supposed to talk answers, I think.

Is this true because I totally need to hash over what the hell I should have wrote with someone else.

Remedies I thought was generally straight forward, although I did not expect a pure remedies to show up. The evidence was heavy on hearsay, but I think I got through most of it. The last question, who the hell knows, I did not have enough time. I felt like the duties and the issues did not line up right, but I kept vomiting duties on the page and forcing them to line up even if askew.

Thank god I reviewed 10b-5 last night before bed. Fuck you, securities law.

Also - was that PT hard to organize for everyone else? The second part lent itself to good headings, but the first part was just a blob, a blob in the blob, and a conclusion blob for me.

You're not alone. Organization was also hard for me. I think the examiners upped the ante with that as a result of making it relatively short.

Was it short?? The library seemed short, true, but the file was long, there were like 7 or eight things in there! Granted, some of them were like 1 paragraph. I did not use that second newspaper article at all by the way. How was it supposed to be used?

[adonai]

Does anyone know if PT subjects are not essay subjects? Meaning since it was a property PT, does that mean we will we not get a property essay?

[adonai]

Was it short?? The library seemed short, true, but the file was long, there were like 7 or eight things in there! Granted, some of them were like 1 paragraph. I did not use that second newspaper article at all by the way. How was it supposed to be used?

Maybe it's because I did a lot of practice PTs, but I thought it was short. It was at least 1/3 shorter than a normal PT.

I just checked the testing history for remedies. This is the 5th straight time remedies has been tested. It is basically the new PR.

[Law-So-Hard]

glamping sounds really fun but that PT can go **** itself

[lmr]

Was it short?? The library seemed short, true, but the file was long, there were like 7 or eight things in there! Granted, some of them were like 1 paragraph. I did not use that second newspaper article at all by the way. How was it supposed to be used?

Maybe it's because I did a lot of practice PTs, but I thought it was short. It was at least 1/3 shorter than a normal PT.

I just checked the testing history for remedies. This is the 5th straight time remedies has been tested. It is basically the new PR.

No-they'll stop testing it for 5 sessions just to fk with people…watch we get CP + corps on thursday. That would make CP three in a row. If we get contracts I'll be annoyed-are they really going to do Ks + full remedies again like they did last summer? They better test CRIM.

[Lasers]

I failed everything except remedies and maybe evidence. That last PR question was brutal. Didn't include 10b5 because I didn't think there was fraud but talked about insider trading...stupid stupid. None of the duties really fit...ugh.

PT was a mess. Didn't know how to organize it besides the two charges. Just threw in random facts and then random factor tests. Wow.

Fuck February bar.

[Anonnn]

Was it short?? The library seemed short, true, but the file was long, there were like 7 or eight things in there! Granted, some of them were like 1 paragraph. I did not use that second newspaper article at all by the way. How was it supposed to be used?

Maybe it's because I did a lot of practice PTs, but I thought it was short. It was at least 1/3 shorter than a normal PT.

I just checked the testing history for remedies. This is the 5th straight time remedies has been tested. It is basically the new PR.

Even if it was shorter it definitely had more facts than the couple PTs I looked at.