California Bar Exam (July 2014) thread Forum

[Mr. Pink]

Well shit.

Contrary to the expectations I had formed, the real thing felt a lot harder than all the practices I did. Hard plus a lot of bizarre nuances. Also i spent nearly the whole time whereas i usually was finishing 30-45 minutes early. Hope it want just me.

This was me in a nutshell. Did a massive amount of MBE prep Qs (including 3 full OPEs with excellent scores) and felt like I got my ass kicked.

Yeah, I felt like I was doing really well on the practice ones (through Kaplan)... My averages were in the mid 70s but over the two weeks leading up to the bar I was scoring 42 or 45 out of sets of 50. Most of my classmates felt this was much easier than the Kaplan ones, but I seemed to have more trouble with them. I finished the morning with 30+ minutes to go, and the afternoon with 20ish minutes left... ( I wanted to get out of there before the 15 minute warning).

I still thing the most frustrating thing is listening to Morgan Freeman read those damn instructions and pause after every other word (Ontario taker)

[LSATNightmares]

Impressions today:

There was a lot not in Barbri. I felt like all the work I did doing virtually all of the Barbri questions didn't help.

I did a double take when Civ Pro showed up for me on the MBE. I knew they were adding it in February, but I wasn't expecting a question about it strangely enough. Luckily, I didn't have to stress too much about that one.

I'm utterly spent now. Tons of people left early, but I'm not sure how so many people could leave early. I only finished with 5 minutes remaining.

[Mr. Pink]

Impressions today:

There was a lot not in Barbri. I felt like all the work I did doing virtually all of the Barbri questions didn't help.

I did a double take when Civ Pro showed up for me on the MBE. I knew they were adding it in February, but I wasn't expecting a question about it strangely enough. Luckily, I didn't have to stress too much about that one.

I'm utterly spent now. Tons of people left early, but I'm not sure how so many people could leave early. I only finished with 5 minutes remaining.

Yesterday, a guy 2 rows in front of me packed his stuff up and left after about 20 minutes. I guess he didn't like the essays. It made me laugh because I don't get distracted or anything.... but even if you think you're going to fail, go ahead and take the damn thing... you can't get your money back and it's at least practice for the next time; and who knows, you might pass anyway.

[Mr. Pink]

For the hearsay statements did any one else get

1st: admit first statement (not offered to prove truth of the matter asserted)
2nd: exclude second statement (not a party opponent statement because absence of special relation
3rd: admit maintenance report (business record)

Wait why admit the first but not the second when they were both EEs of ABC?

As for the maintenance report, I can't remember what I put now about the inner hearsay. I think I said it might qualify as a contemporaneous statement IF custodian testified that the reports are written near the time of the events they report on. But that whole thing seems ridic to me now, and I'm super confused.

Yeah vicarious admission-he was employed, made statement within scope of employment, etc. I thought that was clearer than the first statement considering other guy was a mechanic and 2nd man was a supervisor of the company.

Then there was the competency of W.

I can't remember which was which, but one of them (I think the response from Sal to the question posed), I admitted as non-hearsay... they weren't offering to prove that "there's always a little gunk typical of that fuel" they were offering to show that they knew of the gunk and did not do the test. Maybe I missed something, but I don't think that was hearsay so it gets in

[a male human]

Impressions today:

There was a lot not in Barbri. I felt like all the work I did doing virtually all of the Barbri questions didn't help.

I did a double take when Civ Pro showed up for me on the MBE. I knew they were adding it in February, but I wasn't expecting a question about it strangely enough. Luckily, I didn't have to stress too much about that one.

I'm utterly spent now. Tons of people left early, but I'm not sure how so many people could leave early. I only finished with 5 minutes remaining.

There's always people like that. They could just be well prepared or well on their way to February.

I forgot to tell you guys to skip any civ pro questions and come back to them at the end because there's a greater likelihood they are experimental.

[Law-So-Hard]

Ridiculous amount of remedies and civ pro q's. I thought barbri questions were supposed to be harder but at least they tested on obscure stuff from what was in the cmr not weird things ive never seen before in my life!!!

Not sure if this is in poor taste but any predictions for tomorrow? I really hope we dont get cal civ pro and calbar took out all its civ pro on us today

[lmr]

Those are not civ pro questions they are evidence questions

[pkt63]

I can't remember which was which, but one of them (I think the response from Sal to the question posed), I admitted as non-hearsay... they weren't offering to prove that "there's always a little gunk typical of that fuel" they were offering to show that they knew of the gunk and did not do the test. Maybe I missed something, but I don't think that was hearsay so it gets in

Yeah, I put that too and didn't have any real reason to not just leave it there, but felt like we are supposed to put all the possible reasons it can get in, so even though I said it was non hearsay, I was like, "if it is not allowed in as non hearsay…" and also got it in as hearsay exempt.

[Carryon]

Well shit.

Contrary to the expectations I had formed, the real thing felt a lot harder than all the practices I did. Hard plus a lot of bizarre nuances. Also i spent nearly the whole time whereas i usually was finishing 30-45 minutes early. Hope it want just me.

This was me in a nutshell. Did a massive amount of MBE prep Qs (including 3 full OPEs with excellent scores) and felt like I got my ass kicked.

Yeah, I felt like I was doing really well on the practice ones (through Kaplan)... My averages were in the mid 70s but over the two weeks leading up to the bar I was scoring 42 or 45 out of sets of 50. Most of my classmates felt this was much easier than the Kaplan ones, but I seemed to have more trouble with them. I finished the morning with 30+ minutes to go, and the afternoon with 20ish minutes left... ( I wanted to get out of there before the 15 minute warning).

I still thing the most frustrating thing is listening to Morgan Freeman read those damn instructions and pause after every other word (Ontario taker)

I liked it when he told us to say good morning again. It's almost noon for me in my eastern time zone.

[a male human]

Ridiculous amount of remedies and civ pro q's. I thought barbri questions were supposed to be harder but at least they tested on obscure stuff from what was in the cmr not weird things ive never seen before in my life!!!

Not sure if this is in poor taste but any predictions for tomorrow? I really hope we dont get cal civ pro and calbar took out all its civ pro on us today

MBE is administered by the NCBE rather than the CalBar. Any subject is fair game for tomorrow (less likely the ones tested Tuesday but may still be a crossover).

[Anonnn]

MBE Impressions: I think they were slightly easier than Barbri simply because unlike Barbri I could pretty much always eliminate two. With Barbri, there would be times where I could see how at least 3, maybe even all 4 could be right. Here, I felt pretty confident about the two being wrong.

That said, there were definitely 5ish on both morning and afternoon that I took a total shot in the dark on.

Only really noticed one obviously civ pro question which made me laugh because the only reason I knew it was because I took Fed Courts.

Oh and afternoon definitely felt harder than morning but not overwhelmingly so.

Still feeling a little bruised from getting yesterday's securities component entirely completely wrong and remembered a couple of misstatements of law I made on yesterday's essays but today made me feel relatively good. I'd say on the whole out of the 100 questions I answered probably 80 on each with a strong certainty (which is not at all to say that they're right, simply that I didn't feel totally lost).

We'll see what happens.

Predictions for tomorrows essays: Wills/Trusts, CA Civ Pro, Crim Pro.

[lmr]

Wtf is up w this RIDICULOUS amount of mortgages questions? 15 questions- give me a break-Is this really what the ncbe thinks attorneys should be well versed in? So many other testable areas in prop-it seems like a strategic way to say F U to applicants who want to prep w old exams or rely on prep courses. Ridiculous how all all this crap i learned in prop over the summer isn't even being tested-not the case w the other MBE subjects imo.

[Mr. Pink]

Well shit.

Contrary to the expectations I had formed, the real thing felt a lot harder than all the practices I did. Hard plus a lot of bizarre nuances. Also i spent nearly the whole time whereas i usually was finishing 30-45 minutes early. Hope it want just me.

This was me in a nutshell. Did a massive amount of MBE prep Qs (including 3 full OPEs with excellent scores) and felt like I got my ass kicked.

Yeah, I felt like I was doing really well on the practice ones (through Kaplan)... My averages were in the mid 70s but over the two weeks leading up to the bar I was scoring 42 or 45 out of sets of 50. Most of my classmates felt this was much easier than the Kaplan ones, but I seemed to have more trouble with them. I finished the morning with 30+ minutes to go, and the afternoon with 20ish minutes left... ( I wanted to get out of there before the 15 minute warning).

I still thing the most frustrating thing is listening to Morgan Freeman read those damn instructions and pause after every other word (Ontario taker)

I liked it when he told us to say good morning again. It's almost noon for me in my eastern time zone.

Haha, I must have already tuned him out and missed that. I'm Central time, so I'm thinking lunch when we start too.

[umstah]

does anyone feel like they kind of ... enter some sort of weird mental place during full MBE sets where the questions just become kind of a blur? it's not like you're distracted or even that unfocused, but at the same time you're not 100% mentally there. you're kind of just on autopilot.

i tried fighting it during today's mbe. failed. maybe it's just me...

[dtl]

What I learned today, is that knowing how the Eerie doctrine does not matter. In more than one way.

Also taking a real estate finance course my last semester holy shit what a good idea, but I had no fucking clue it would even be applicable to the bar at the time.

And I wish the ontario guy really did sound like morgan freedman. His voice is not near as relaxing.

[Mr. Pink]

does anyone feel like they kind of ... enter some sort of weird mental place during full MBE sets where the questions just become kind of a blur? it's not like you're distracted or even that unfocused, but at the same time you're not 100% mentally there. you're kind of just on autopilot.

i tried fighting it during today's mbe. failed. maybe it's just me...

Not so much "auto-pilot" for me, but definitely felt different than I doing practice MBEs the last couple of months. Today it seemed like I could easily get it down to the two close answers, then couldn't justify one over the other. It did seem like there were a lot more crappy answers to choose from- like pick the best defense and the four listed were complete bullshit when there were better defenses out there in the real world.


And for those taking in Feb (whether planned or because it didn't work out this time) I would not worry about Civ Pro based off of the ones I saw today. They were very simple and straightforward... and that's without any practice Civ Pro MBEs.

[dtl]

And for those taking in Feb (whether planned or because it didn't work out this time) I would not worry about Civ Pro based off of the ones I saw today. They were very simple and straightforward... and that's without any practice Civ Pro MBEs.

Know fed choice of law and Eerie. I forget what the one other clearly civ pro topic they asked about was, but there was one. The rest sat on the line between evidence and civ pro.

[Determination3]

Hey Guys,

Quick question about Yesterday's PR/Corp Question

So I got the 10b5 issue(general 10b5, tipper, tippee, and misappropriation).

But on the first three mentioned above, my analysis was so totally wrong. I blanked out on the issue that since the dude owned shares, he was a shareholder and if he was a 10%er, the rules applied to him.

I wanted to know, do they give points for raising the issue and doing a shitty analysis that doesn't use the facts). Or am I screwed. I guess I just wanted to know, do you get points just for raising the issues.

Also for Evidence: did anyone get subsequent remedial measure?

[jarofsoup]

Hey Guys,

Quick question about Yesterday's PR/Corp Question

So I got the 10b5 issue(general 10b5, tipper, tippee, and misappropriation).

But on the first three mentioned above, my analysis was so totally wrong. I blanked out on the issue that since the dude owned shares, he was a shareholder and if he was a 10%er, the rules applied to him.

I wanted to know, do they give points for raising the issue and doing a shitty analysis that doesn't use the facts). Or am I screwed. I guess I just wanted to know, do you get points just for raising the issues.

Also for Evidence: did anyone get subsequent remedial measure?

I think that question was terrible all around. I probably bombed it along with everyone else. Probably lowers the curve, so could be a positive thing.

Whats on the docket tomorrow? Predictions?

[dtl]

I blanked out on the issue that since the dude owned shares, he was a shareholder and if he was a 10%er, the rules applied to him.

Wait. The 10% thing matters with the short swing profit rule. Am I missing how that factors into 10b-5?

I did not even notice he was a >10% holder. I guess that means his earnings would have to be disgorged via the short swing rule in addition to 10b-5?

I have a feeling the graders are going to have an interesting time apportioning points on that one.

[lmr]

I blanked out on the issue that since the dude owned shares, he was a shareholder and if he was a 10%er, the rules applied to him.

Wait. The 10% thing matters with the short swing profit rule. Am I missing how that factors into 10b-5?

I did not even notice he was a >10% holder. I guess that means his earnings would have to be disgorged via the short swing rule in addition to 10b-5?

I have a feeling the graders are going to have an interesting time apportioning points on that one.

It never said she had 10% of the shares. It said 10,000 shares. I totally thought they were going for a short sale but no-def not enough facts to intelligently argue for 16b

[bravos89]

Honestly the MBE wasn't that bad. There were more obvious ones than I feel like the Barbri had but more difficult ones as well. I feel like some people here just freak out and feel like they're going to fail if they run into 7-8 question out of 200 that they don't know. Relax guys.

[bravos89]

I blanked out on the issue that since the dude owned shares, he was a shareholder and if he was a 10%er, the rules applied to him.

Wait. The 10% thing matters with the short swing profit rule. Am I missing how that factors into 10b-5?

I did not even notice he was a >10% holder. I guess that means his earnings would have to be disgorged via the short swing rule in addition to 10b-5?

I have a feeling the graders are going to have an interesting time apportioning points on that one.

It never said she had 10% of the shares. It said 10,000 shares. I totally thought they were going for a short sale but no-def not enough facts to intelligently argue for 16b

Feel like it's kind of pointless to keep going over these minute points about parts of one question but it definitely didn't mention percentage of shares at all. Not entirely sure, but I'm pretty sure there also wasn't any info about the dates of her purchase/sale as it would have stood out in the fact pattern so you would just have to make pretty much just assume/stipulate both material elements to argue 16-b. Seems really far-fetched to argue that when you already have a 10b-5 violation that will result in pretty much the same thing.

[lmr]

Was not manifest necessity the correct response-seriously been bothering me all day.

[patogordo]

Was not manifest necessity the correct response-seriously been bothering me all day.

http://www.law.cornell.edu/anncon/html/ ... _user.html