BarBri Bar Review Hangout - July 2016 (UBE -NY) Forum

[KRose04]

Ugh. I did not do well on the 21 questions on NCBE's website. 13/21. I thought those were much harder than the OPE ones. I hope that's not the average difficulty on the day of the exam or I'm definitely going to walk out of there feeling defeated.

I'm doing them now and think the same thing. They're way harder than the OPE!

What the hell is a designated representative?

Lmfao I LITERALLY just did that question

Tell me what you think of 18.

[+] Spoiler

I picked B. What am I missing in terms of why the agreement should be reduced to writing? Is it because on the contract it (the steel) was individualized and separate?

I said C because it was a contract for services and I thought to orally modify a services contract you needed consideration. For UCC sales contracts you need good faith so I don't understand

Does the website give explanations?

[SLS_AMG]

NCBE Practice #18

[+] Spoiler

I'm not 100% positive, though I'm pretty sure that the following is correct.

Generally, for service contracts (and any non-goods contract that therefore falls outside of UCC Article 2) you need consideration for any modification or otherwise it's a violation of the pre-existing duty rule. However, if something totally unexpected occurs that makes performance significantly more difficult than the parties anticipated, I believe the parties can modify with no added consideration. Also, I think the contract still has to be executory for this to be possible.

I struggled with this one too, but ultimately ended up picking D. To me, a 20% increase in prices isn't crazy under the circumstances, so I hope on the real thing they'd make it like 50% or something.

[LionelHutzJD]

NCBE Practice #18

[+] Spoiler

I'm not 100% positive, though I'm pretty sure that the following is correct.

Generally, for service contracts (and any non-goods contract that therefore falls outside of UCC Article 2) you need consideration for any modification or otherwise it's a violation of the pre-existing duty rule. However, if something totally unexpected occurs that makes performance significantly more difficult than the parties anticipated, I believe the parties can modify with no added consideration. Also, I think the contract still has to be executory for this to be possible.

That's correct. As long as the modification is fair and equitable in light of the unanticipated change.

Btw, apparently Kaplan does not have this in their materials. Good thing we took Barbri

[KRose04]

NCBE Practice #18

[+] Spoiler

I'm not 100% positive, though I'm pretty sure that the following is correct.

Generally, for service contracts (and any non-goods contract that therefore falls outside of UCC Article 2) you need consideration for any modification or otherwise it's a violation of the pre-existing duty rule. However, if something totally unexpected occurs that makes performance significantly more difficult than the parties anticipated, I believe the parties can modify with no added consideration. Also, I think the contract still has to be executory for this to be possible.

That's correct. As long as the modification is fair and equitable in light of the unanticipated change.

Btw, apparently Kaplan does not have this in their materials. Good thing we took Barbri

For the price difference, I don't mind not being told one exception to a rule -__-

[mvp99]

NCBE Practice #18

[+] Spoiler

I'm not 100% positive, though I'm pretty sure that the following is correct.

Generally, for service contracts (and any non-goods contract that therefore falls outside of UCC Article 2) you need consideration for any modification or otherwise it's a violation of the pre-existing duty rule. However, if something totally unexpected occurs that makes performance significantly more difficult than the parties anticipated, I believe the parties can modify with no added consideration. Also, I think the contract still has to be executory for this to be possible.

That's correct. As long as the modification is fair and equitable in light of the unanticipated change.

Btw, apparently Kaplan does not have this in their materials. Good thing we took Barbri

For the price difference, I don't mind not being told one exception to a rule -__-

for the essays, I don't think it's the majority rule.

[SLS_AMG]

Sadly--and based on other people's reactions leaving recent MBEs--I'm expecting a good 15-20 questions on things like legal representatives where we've just never even seen the material.

Especially frustrating in a situation like civ pro, where BarBri gives us like 5-10 questions per set regarding venue and personal jurisdiction, and there will probably be 5 questions on the whole thing on those 2 subjects.

[mvp99]

Sadly--and based on other people's reactions leaving recent MBEs--I'm expecting a good 15-20 questions on things like legal representatives where we've just never even seen the material.

Especially frustrating in a situation like civ pro, where BarBri gives us like 5-10 questions per set regarding venue and personal jurisdiction, and there will probably be 5 questions on the whole thing on those 2 subjects.

lol I don't understand barbri's obsession with venue and jurisdiction. I feel like I'm not well prepared for civ pro.

[grixxlybear99]

I thought tenants in common could sell their interest in land, or rent it out (but see #12 of ncbe sample questions)

[yodamiked]

NCBE Practice #18

[+] Spoiler

I'm not 100% positive, though I'm pretty sure that the following is correct.

Generally, for service contracts (and any non-goods contract that therefore falls outside of UCC Article 2) you need consideration for any modification or otherwise it's a violation of the pre-existing duty rule. However, if something totally unexpected occurs that makes performance significantly more difficult than the parties anticipated, I believe the parties can modify with no added consideration. Also, I think the contract still has to be executory for this to be possible.

That's correct. As long as the modification is fair and equitable in light of the unanticipated change.

Btw, apparently Kaplan does not have this in their materials. Good thing we took Barbri

For the price difference, I don't mind not being told one exception to a rule -__-

for the essays, I don't think it's the majority rule.

According to the CMR, this is the modern view. (1) the modification is due to circumstances that were unanticipated by the parties when the contract was made and (2) it is fair and equitable.

[yodamiked]

I thought tenants in common could sell their interest in land, or rent it out (but see #12 of ncbe sample questions)

Yeah, I looked that up and couldn't find an answer in the CMR. Definitely got that one wrong.

[ronanOgara]

I thought tenants in common could sell their interest in land, or rent it out (but see #12 of ncbe sample questions)

Yeah, I looked that up and couldn't find an answer in the CMR. Definitely got that one wrong.

Here's my reasoning: TiC own undivided interests in the land, can't sell a divided interest.

[learntolift]

question about the MEE predictions...are we all just leaning towards corps/family/trusts because efficient bar prep suggested it? or are there other 'expert' sources verifying that claim?

[ballouttacontrol]

Can someone post or PM me the targeted scores for the Civ Pro sets? I have an old Barbri book, which includes the civ pro questions, but no targeted scores (it says "check online for scores").

They're all 12/18

THANKS! It seems odd that all sets have the same targets, given that the sets generally tend to get harder. Whatever, Barbri.

I've suspected from the beginning that the civpro questions aren't equated like the other questions. Since civpro was only recently added they may not have done the analysis to equate averages yet.

I base this off of every civpro average goal being 67%, while I personally find the civpro questions much much easier than the other topics

[squiggle]

Can someone post or PM me the targeted scores for the Civ Pro sets? I have an old Barbri book, which includes the civ pro questions, but no targeted scores (it says "check online for scores").

They're all 12/18

THANKS! It seems odd that all sets have the same targets, given that the sets generally tend to get harder. Whatever, Barbri.

I've suspected from the beginning that the civpro questions aren't equated like the other questions. Since civpro was only recently added they may not have done the analysis to equate averages yet.

I base this off of every civpro average goal being 67%, while I personally find the civpro questions much much easier than the other topics

At this point, civ pro has been on 3 previous exam (Feb 15, July 15, and Feb 16), so I'd expect there to a better handle on the averages for each set. Whatever, Barbri.

[mvp99]

Gotta say... I'm blown away by the sample questions. Questions are bit different and the set was overall more difficult than previous NCBE questions ive done.

Just read an article about how the NCBE likes to pretend they are scaling the new MBE when it's impossible to do with precision because the new MBE is new and different from the previous 30 years of MBE. The article further says they should've told examinees the new scaled score is not comparable to previous scores.

[SLS_AMG]

Haha yep. If that 21 set is representative of test day, I may be better off just relaxing and living it up till test day, because nothing I do between now and then will save me.

[mvp99]

Haha yep. If that 21 set is representative of test day, I may be better off just relaxing and living it up till test day, because nothing I do between now and then will save me.

Someone from another thread suspects the set is hard to scare you into buying NCBE questions.

[estamosjuntos]

Need to clarify something: Somebody told me the MBE score is a floor. so i.e. for New York you fail if you get below a 133 on the MBE regardless of whether you ace the essays. That true?

[squiggle]

Need to clarify something: Somebody told me the MBE score is a floor. so i.e. for New York you fail if you get below a 133 on the MBE regardless of whether you ace the essays. That true?

In some states yet, but NOT in NY. Just need to reach the 266 between your MBE and your other UBE portions (MEE & MPT).

[WahooLaw24]

Gotta say... I'm blown away by the sample questions. Questions are bit different and the set was overall more difficult than previous NCBE questions ive done.

Just read an article about how the NCBE likes to pretend they are scaling the new MBE when it's impossible to do with precision because the new MBE is new and different from the previous 30 years of MBE. The article further says they should've told examinees the new scaled score is not comparable to previous scores.

Link?

[mvp99]

Gotta say... I'm blown away by the sample questions. Questions are bit different and the set was overall more difficult than previous NCBE questions ive done.

Just read an article about how the NCBE likes to pretend they are scaling the new MBE when it's impossible to do with precision because the new MBE is new and different from the previous 30 years of MBE. The article further says they should've told examinees the new scaled score is not comparable to previous scores.

Link?

http://www.lawschoolcafe.org/2015/04/16 ... procedure/

[Itwasluck]

I'm going to echo what a few people have said already. I was shocked by how tough the 21 sample questions were. So much so that I bought Test 4 to see if it was better. Ended up getting 84/100 on that test after getting 14/21 on the samples. I can't wait for the mind games to be over

[jj252525]

Evidence question 18, set 6

[+] Spoiler

That's a dirty, dirty trick

[yodamiked]

For anyone who has done any of the OPE sets, can you see the answers or results before finishing the whole thing? In other words, can I do 25 at a time, review the answers, and then do another 25?

[jj252525]

For anyone who has done any of the OPE sets, can you see the answers or results before finishing the whole thing? In other words, can I do 25 at a time, review the answers, and then do another 25?

Yes. It's a bit cumbersome, but you can.