California Bar Exam (July 2014) thread Forum

[dtl]

The only time I've ever heard of Manifest Destiny was in regards to the 19th century belief of the right of American Expansion so I just assumed answer was ridiculous. Ooops.

Manifest NECESSITY not destiny lol…I think it was on my critical pass card and that just prompted me to go for it esp since the rest of the choices seemed wrong.

Wow...my brain is not working. LOL. I literally thought that was what the answer option said. Skipped over that question pretty fast.

Declaring a mistrial on manifest destiny would have saved the native americans (and mexico) a lot of trouble.

[Jay Heizenburg]

How likely does everybody think it is that Real Property won't be an essay because we had a Real Property based PT?

Iam going to predict it will not be on it. I think crim, trusts, and civ pro will be the subjects. Torts was discuss a little I for q2 and q3 Tuesday. Trusts has not come up for a while and crim wasn't talked bout at all Tuesday other than insider trading maybe. But, you never know.

What about Community Property?

http://www.caexpungementlaw.com/#!Swami ... I-/c19na/1

If you want a summary of past test subjects over the last few years, this is a pretty good one.

Community property is low probability........... but so was remedies.

As soon as I saw Remedies, I knew for a fact ... the Bar is ruthless, they don't give a fuck, and everything's game ...

[dtl]

The FHA one was advertising prohibition. 90% sure.

[chicoalto0649]

Anyone notice how they now they just tell us whether it's race notice v. just notice jurisdiction? They didn't do that on the OPE from July 2013 or their other recent OPEs. I recall barbri and emmanuel's teaching us how to decipher the language to be able to tell what type of recording statute it was and now they just give it to us

All I remember is blah blah blah "first".... Race notice. Anything else, notice. Pure race states don't pop up?

[chicoalto0649]

The FHA one was advertising prohibition. 90% sure.

Right I thought there was some exception for 4 unit apartments or less... Again totally spitballing

[lmr]

FHA anyone? Thought there was an exception there but stretching way back to 1L. Maybe it was experimental??

I picked it violated FHA-gender/race. Sounded familiar from 1L but was like wtf…lady facing eviction-was LL outrageous bc it was repetitive or not outrageous bc he's asking for rent? I forgot which i picked but i struggled w that one

[Jay Heizenburg]

FHA anyone? Thought there was an exception there but stretching way back to 1L. Maybe it was experimental??

Has to be ...

That was an early, "I don't know, let's just move on," question.

[bravos89]

The FHA one was advertising prohibition. 90% sure.

Right I thought there was some exception for 4 unit apartments or less... Again totally spitballing

Yeah, the Mrs Murphy exception for if you live in and rent out four of fewer units. Turns out that the exemption doesn't apply to advertising the rental with discriminatory language though. Just looked it up.

[lmr]

The FHA one was advertising prohibition. 90% sure.

Right I thought there was some exception for 4 unit apartments or less... Again totally spitballing

So discrimination based on race is immaterial? Doesn't FHA forbid discrim based on gender/race/religion etc.?

[uvauvauva]

What do you think will happen tomorrow? What subjects?

I think: Crim, Property, and Civ

Someone who tutored with Jason Martz (sp?) and some other people said she was sure about civ.

[Law-So-Hard]

My predictions:

Cal civ pro testing on pj, SMJ, an Erie concept that will include something about torts, motion for sum judgment and res judicata and coll estoppel applying primary rights again lending itself to some element discussion of torts or contracts and a little bit on defendants responde

Community property and wills/trusts: either or

Con law: first amendment and torts (defamation) cross over

Crim pro and law with a prof responsibility thing dealing w prosecutors

[Law-So-Hard]

I also feel like the PT will be something left field

[a male human]

I don't think CA civ pro will appear.

[gyarados]

Did they say we have to be there earlier tomorrow?

[jarofsoup]

My guess for what it is worth:

Wills & Trusts
MBE topic (I hope torts, Pure Crim Law or con law EPC).
State topic

[gaagoots]

I don't think CA civ pro will appear.

I agree, they will likely start CA Civ Pro once MBE Civ Pro kick in, like evidence does now and then. Knowing how they want to give examinees one last shot to prove this session they know their FRCP, before Feb. I'm guessing it may be an essay.

I think Wilma may come to the fact pattern and she was married to Ted the testator. Hopefully not another...Ted you got me pregnant before our divorce but screw you he's yours because he was born 300 days after it was final.

I work in family law this drama on bar essays never happens in real life.

[Anonnn]

.

[iLoveFruits&Veggies]

I don't think CA civ pro will appear.

I'm going to say the same thing because I want to put some positive energy out there! No CA Civ Pro!

[dtl]

I work in family law this drama on bar essays never happens in real life.

Stop crushing my dreams.

As far as I am concerned, con law lawyers have to deal with 2-3 people wanting to open up dildo parlours next to a pre school each workday.

Tort lawyers keep having these trucks carrying dynamite, gasoline or sarin nerve gas cutting people off in traffic because of an oil slick.

Criminal defense lawyers are barraged with people who went to retrieve the bed pan they lent their neighbor Ned, but then decided to steal his blender after they had already gone inside his house.

All lawyers have sex with their clients all the time, and then either loan them a bunch of money, or report the fact that they are literally Bernie Madoff to the SEC before getting disbarred by California.

This is the only world I have known for the last three months.

[pkt63]

The FHA one was advertising prohibition. 90% sure.

Right I thought there was some exception for 4 unit apartments or less... Again totally spitballing

Yeah, the Mrs Murphy exception for if you live in and rent out four of fewer units. Turns out that the exemption doesn't apply to advertising the rental with discriminatory language though. Just looked it up.

I think there was one answer that just said "race" and the other that said "gender and race" (think it was one involved advertising and the other involved discriminating against tenants in who actually got the apartment). Pretty sure I picked the actual renting one because I thought you could discriminate in advertising on gender but could be completely wrong. Just based on some random piece of information in my head.

yeah, I picked the one about discriminatory advertising being illegal purely because of my real life experience with craigslist. Probably should have gone with whatever seems counter to real life experience, but I had no clue otherwise.

[lmr]

I have a feeling our MBE subject will be contracts, just bc they tested both Remedies and Ks separately last year-they'll do the same thing again to fk w us.

[dtl]

The FHA one was advertising prohibition. 90% sure.

Right I thought there was some exception for 4 unit apartments or less... Again totally spitballing

Yeah, the Mrs Murphy exception for if you live in and rent out four of fewer units. Turns out that the exemption doesn't apply to advertising the rental with discriminatory language though. Just looked it up.

I think there was one answer that just said "race" and the other that said "gender and race" (think it was one involved advertising and the other involved discriminating against tenants in who actually got the apartment). Pretty sure I picked the actual renting one because I thought you could discriminate in advertising on gender but could be completely wrong. Just based on some random piece of information in my head.

The renting one said something concerning how she could not refuse to rent to a certain race, but she said "preferred" instead of "no black people allowed", which is why it was the wrong answer versus the advertising.

I think.

[gaagoots]

I work in family law this drama on bar essays never happens in real life.

Stop crushing my dreams.

As far as I am concerned, con law lawyers have to deal with 2-3 people wanting to open up dildo parlours next to a pre school each workday.

Tort lawyers keep having these trucks carrying dynamite, gasoline or sarin nerve gas cutting people off in traffic because of an oil slick.

Criminal defense lawyers are barraged with people who went to retrieve the bed pan they lent their neighbor Ned, but then decided to steal his blender after they had already gone inside his house.

All lawyers have sex with their clients all the time, and then either loan them a bunch of money, or report the fact that they are literally Bernie Madoff to the SEC before getting disbarred by California.

This is the only world I have known for the last three months.

Well how many times in a client interview have I thought, God this would be a damn good bar question. When will they test same sex marriages and DP's? Women generally do not hide kids from baby daddy they want his money now, not when he is dead :-$

[pkt63]

I think there was one answer that just said "race" and the other that said "gender and race" (think it was one involved advertising and the other involved discriminating against tenants in who actually got the apartment). Pretty sure I picked the actual renting one because I thought you could discriminate in advertising on gender but could be completely wrong. Just based on some random piece of information in my head.

The renting one said something concerning how she could not refuse to rent to a certain race, but she said "preferred" instead of "no black people allowed", which is why it was the wrong answer versus the advertising.

I think.[/quote]

Again disclaimer about real life experience being auto wrong, but craigslist will shut your shit down if you even indicate a preference for anything, and I'm pretty sure they reference the FHA.

[dtl]

I think there was one answer that just said "race" and the other that said "gender and race" (think it was one involved advertising and the other involved discriminating against tenants in who actually got the apartment). Pretty sure I picked the actual renting one because I thought you could discriminate in advertising on gender but could be completely wrong. Just based on some random piece of information in my head.

The renting one said something concerning how she could not refuse to rent to a certain race, but she said "preferred" instead of "no black people allowed", which is why it was the wrong answer versus the advertising.

I think
Again disclaimer about real life experience being auto wrong, but craigslist will shut your shit down if you even indicate a preference for anything, and I'm pretty sure they reference the FHA.

.[/quote]


Arg I have been misquoted!

but yeah that is where craigslist is getting it from.