California Bar Exam (July 2014) thread Forum

[Mr. Pink]

Sitting here in this damn airport and I can't help but think of stuff a missed or should have explained better. Damnit... It's not bothering me about the test, just annoying that it will be nearly 4 months before I know anything or not.

That one-timer bar passer site that helps calculate your grades made me feel better though.

[iLoveFruits&Veggies]

Am I the only one who thinks it makes a LOT more sense to read the file FIRST and then the library? Everyone has told me to do it the other way around. I took the advice and read the library first for the first PT exam, and completely messed up, and ran out of time... but for the 2nd PT, I read the file first, and then the library and found that it made a ton more sense to become familiar with the details of the case before looking for the rules. Feel HORRIBLE about the first PT, really good about the 2nd one! Won't be enough to make up for the damage done on Tuesday though... or those horrid MBEs that were nothing like the previous NBCE questions I did!

[Carryon]

Am I the only one who thinks it makes a LOT more sense to read the file FIRST and then the library? Everyone has told me to do it the other way around. I took the advice and read the library first for the first PT exam, and completely messed up, and ran out of time... but for the 2nd PT, I read the file first, and then the library and found that it made a ton more sense to become familiar with the details of the case before looking for the rules. Feel HORRIBLE about the first PT, really good about the 2nd one! Won't be enough to make up for the damage done on Tuesday though... or those horrid MBEs that were nothing like the previous NBCE questions I did!

I did read the file first for both. I especially took the time to read with a little skimming the whole file and library for the second pt. It really help me understand everything and made of a better analysis.

[lithoman]

I am terrible at professional responsibility and figure I should know this shit for actual practice. What exactly is a lawyer's duty when he knows a client is about to falsely testify? From what I remember, you have to attempt to dissuade him and then, if he refuses, must withdraw because you know continued employment will result in ethical violations. After that, if you can't withdraw for some reason, you have to disclose to the tribunal (ABA) or ask around it in CA. Correct?

[EZ as AsDf]

What do you mean you used the "wrong" headings?

I think they wanted headings that were persuasive and not conclusionsry like

THE ARBITRATOR ACTED WITHIN HIS AUTHORITY TO REVISE YADAYADA

not

The petitioner is wrong

Something like that. I suck at writing these things.

One of my headings was: the doctrine of functis oficio does not bar the Amended Final ... Because the Amended Final ... was not a cmplete determination of the issues submitted...

Is that the wrong type of heading?

[lmr]

What do you mean you used the "wrong" headings?

I think they wanted headings that were persuasive and not conclusionsry like

THE ARBITRATOR ACTED WITHIN HIS AUTHORITY TO REVISE YADAYADA

not

The petitioner is wrong

Something like that. I suck at writing these things.

One of my headings was: the doctrine of functis oficio does not bar the Amended Final ... Because the Amended Final ... was not a cmplete determination of the issues submitted...

Is that the wrong type of heading?

No-the instructions said they wanted you to say why in your heading so you needed to include a because-you are fine.

[071816]

What do you mean you used the "wrong" headings?

I think they wanted headings that were persuasive and not conclusionsry like

THE ARBITRATOR ACTED WITHIN HIS AUTHORITY TO REVISE YADAYADA

not

The petitioner is wrong

Something like that. I suck at writing these things.

One of my headings was: the doctrine of functis oficio does not bar the Amended Final ... Because the Amended Final ... was not a cmplete determination of the issues submitted...

Is that the wrong type of heading?

No-the instructions said they wanted you to say why in your heading so you needed to include a because-you are fine.

doesn't matter anymore

[InTheWideLand I Walk]

And, did I mention that in February in my reread they changed SIX out of EIGHT of my written scores. What does that say about the fluid standards, or lack thereof.

and you know what the best part is? the only qualification to be a bar exam essay grader is you must have passed the bar exam on the second or first attempt. so you know that dumb doofus from law school who miraculously passed the bar exam and couldnt get a job? yeah, he is grading your essay. and there is no real oversight either. They just spend about three minutes grading your essay while their eyes are numb from reading hundreds of essays that day. the 'reread' isnt oversight either, they just pass it to another doofus who does the same thing.

they probably get a kick out of it to.

[CAWondering86]

I did a standard under.... does... when Question heading. God..I hope thats OK. It just makes it seem more persuasive when you use the "when"

[EZ as AsDf]

It's impossible to know what they do, how they do it, or why they do it. I failed in Feb by three points. Thought I did a decent job in PTA, got a 55. Felt good about PTB, not great, but better than PTA, got a 75. Didn't feel anything like a 75. Essay grading, same crap. Love property, discussed just about everything I saw in published answers, 55. Con Law, not my thing. 75. Spent 35 mins on that dumb ass civ pro question because I didn't know what to say. At all. Got a 60. The point is that it is IMPOSSIBLE to speculate on what you get. I don't feel good at all about this round, other than crim pro and torts, and maybe remedies. Not taking this shit again.

What was your mbe score?

This worries me. Property- when you wrote your essay, you felt like you hit the right issues? Then you saw the published answers and your essay hit the issues if published answers, yet you failed the essay?

I felt like I hit a lot of the issues in the criminal procedure question, but that there's a possibility that maybe I didn't do so hot.

And then I'm thinking... What if the question was easy for everyone? Do they grade harder? So that you feel like you tore that shit up, but the person who hit it before you did to... So then the grader has a tougher job distinguishing between passing and not passing

... And then your essay falls by the wayside...

I'll clarify, just ask where

[chicoalto0649]

did they test evidence too on the Crim Pro question, I.e., excluding Miranda for all purposes, so in otherwords cant admit for guilt but can admit at sentencing or impeachment?

[Carryon]

It's impossible to know what they do, how they do it, or why they do it. I failed in Feb by three points. Thought I did a decent job in PTA, got a 55. Felt good about PTB, not great, but better than PTA, got a 75. Didn't feel anything like a 75. Essay grading, same crap. Love property, discussed just about everything I saw in published answers, 55. Con Law, not my thing. 75. Spent 35 mins on that dumb ass civ pro question because I didn't know what to say. At all. Got a 60. The point is that it is IMPOSSIBLE to speculate on what you get. I don't feel good at all about this round, other than crim pro and torts, and maybe remedies. Not taking this shit again.

What was your mbe score?

This worries me. Property- when you wrote your essay, you felt like you hit the right issues? Then you saw the published answers and your essay hit the issues if published answers, yet you failed the essay?

I felt like I hit a lot of the issues in the criminal procedure question, but that there's a possibility that maybe I didn't do so hot.

And then I'm thinking... What if the question was easy for everyone? Do they grade harder? So that you feel like you tore that shit up, but the person who hit it before you did to... So then the grader has a tougher job distinguishing between passing and not passing

... And then your essay falls by the wayside...

I'll clarify, just ask where

It is a little vague on how one gets your scores. But, I did feel that I did fairly well on the constitutional essay for the Feb2014 bar and actually did so. Yet, I too, thought that I did well on the real property but found out it was my lowest score.

[lmr]

It's impossible to know what they do, how they do it, or why they do it. I failed in Feb by three points. Thought I did a decent job in PTA, got a 55. Felt good about PTB, not great, but better than PTA, got a 75. Didn't feel anything like a 75. Essay grading, same crap. Love property, discussed just about everything I saw in published answers, 55. Con Law, not my thing. 75. Spent 35 mins on that dumb ass civ pro question because I didn't know what to say. At all. Got a 60. The point is that it is IMPOSSIBLE to speculate on what you get. I don't feel good at all about this round, other than crim pro and torts, and maybe remedies. Not taking this shit again.

What was your mbe score?

This worries me. Property- when you wrote your essay, you felt like you hit the right issues? Then you saw the published answers and your essay hit the issues if published answers, yet you failed the essay?

I felt like I hit a lot of the issues in the criminal procedure question, but that there's a possibility that maybe I didn't do so hot.

And then I'm thinking... What if the question was easy for everyone? Do they grade harder? So that you feel like you tore that shit up, but the person who hit it before you did to... So then the grader has a tougher job distinguishing between passing and not passing

... And then your essay falls by the wayside...

I'll clarify, just ask where

I'm not even-75% of graduates from ABA accredited law schools pass in CA on their first time. It's not THAT random. I'm not buying this hype. That the grading is so arbitrary that you won't pass. I'll buy 60-65/70-75 is arbitrary but collectively as a whole no. You aren't going to get a 55 on one read and a 70 on another. Also MBE score would be really helpful in this discussion bc you only need a 60 TOTAL AVERAGE written score and a 70% MBE score to pass.

[Lasers]

For pt-b re: punitives, did anyway say it didn't matter if there was error or not? The case law was pretty explicit about no judicial review of arbitration on the merits, even with serious error/effect.

I fucked up pt-a (organizational/analysis disaster) and also missed a lot on the two hybrid essays. Feel strongly that I passed the other 4. I think for me it'll come down to MBE. I messed up badly on the pm side but it's hard to tell how badly.

[Lasers]

It's impossible to know what they do, how they do it, or why they do it. I failed in Feb by three points. Thought I did a decent job in PTA, got a 55. Felt good about PTB, not great, but better than PTA, got a 75. Didn't feel anything like a 75. Essay grading, same crap. Love property, discussed just about everything I saw in published answers, 55. Con Law, not my thing. 75. Spent 35 mins on that dumb ass civ pro question because I didn't know what to say. At all. Got a 60. The point is that it is IMPOSSIBLE to speculate on what you get. I don't feel good at all about this round, other than crim pro and torts, and maybe remedies. Not taking this shit again.

What was your mbe score?

This worries me. Property- when you wrote your essay, you felt like you hit the right issues? Then you saw the published answers and your essay hit the issues if published answers, yet you failed the essay?

I felt like I hit a lot of the issues in the criminal procedure question, but that there's a possibility that maybe I didn't do so hot.

And then I'm thinking... What if the question was easy for everyone? Do they grade harder? So that you feel like you tore that shit up, but the person who hit it before you did to... So then the grader has a tougher job distinguishing between passing and not passing

... And then your essay falls by the wayside...

I'll clarify, just ask where

I'm not even-75% of graduates from ABA accredited law schools pass in CA on their first time. It's not THAT random. I'm not buying this hype. That the grading is so arbitrary that you won't pass. I'll buy 60-65/70-75 is arbitrary but collectively as a whole no. You aren't going to get a 55 on one read and a 70 on another. Also MBE score would be really helpful in this discussion bc you only need a 60 TOTAL AVERAGE written score and a 70% MBE score to pass.

70% on that MBE...no way. I definitely need way over 60% on the essays then.

[lmr]

Look at Page 3
--LinkRemoved--

[injun]

I have seen that Barbri report before and was always curious...do you guys think that July 2013 was a fluke of some sort? It varies pretty significantly from July 2012

[AMCD]

would have to look back to see what my total written score was. but, hes they average the two, so its never good. mostly bumped me down. they did it by fice points on each of the six. thats thirty f'ing points. if one of those six had not been changed, i would have about squeaked by.


on that second trusts call, i rambled on about it being a discretionary trust also, hence more particularly emphasized the need to use the funds as dictated upon disbursement. also did cy pres. and said that the AG would review if a registered charity and would aid in reviewing misappropriation of the money. said trustees can ask for full accounting to note misuse of the donation. yeah, who the hell really knows. wrote crap on the CP part because calls one and two took so damn long. shit i hate this process.

[Mr. Pink]

For pt-b re: punitives, did anyway say it didn't matter if there was error or not? The case law was pretty explicit about no judicial review of arbitration on the merits, even with serious error/effect.

I fucked up pt-a (organizational/analysis disaster) and also missed a lot on the two hybrid essays. Feel strongly that I passed the other 4. I think for me it'll come down to MBE. I messed up badly on the pm side but it's hard to tell how badly.

In regards to PT-B and the Punitive damages- yes and also because the cases stated that the arbitrator had broad range to apply remedies even if it were something that the court would not have issued.

As to the essays, I thought I smoked the first day, then did fairly average the next day. The more I think about it, the more minor issues I think about it. I'm pretty sure I got everything down in the bulk of the essays, but my organization wasn't up to par like I usually am. Oh well, going kayaking and laying on the beach for a few days.

[AMCD]

I am terrible at professional responsibility and figure I should know this shit for actual practice. What exactly is a lawyer's duty when he knows a client is about to falsely testify? From what I remember, you have to attempt to dissuade him and then, if he refuses, must withdraw because you know continued employment will result in ethical violations. After that, if you can't withdraw for some reason, you have to disclose to the tribunal (ABA) or ask around it in CA. Correct?

i did, tell him not to perjure himself, try to persuade, try to withraw if not going to delay or prejudice the clients case, the in crim cases have to let him testify, but in narrative fashion. maybe??

[Carryon]

I am terrible at professional responsibility and figure I should know this shit for actual practice. What exactly is a lawyer's duty when he knows a client is about to falsely testify? From what I remember, you have to attempt to dissuade him and then, if he refuses, must withdraw because you know continued employment will result in ethical violations. After that, if you can't withdraw for some reason, you have to disclose to the tribunal (ABA) or ask around it in CA. Correct?

i did, tell him not to perjure himself, try to persuade, try to withraw if not going to delay or prejudice the clients case, the in crim cases have to let him testify, but in narrative fashion. maybe??

i think crim def has right to testify. Ca rules make them testify in narrative fashion if it is a civil case.

[AMCD]

ha, ha, well there goes that then! i did blab on about the 6th amendment giving the right to testify regardless of what he wants to say, so deny motion. whatever

[david33mba]

Re: PT2. Why can't the buyer get punitive damages? The parties jointly submitted two claims for arbitration: breach of contract and fraudulent misrepresentation (intentional omission where the plaintiff reasonably expected disclosure). The latter is a business tort eligible for punitives, no?

I analyzed it that way too. The punitive damages were related to the concealment, which could be a tort such as misrepresentation. but, I don't know, I did that part pretty quick at the end with my brain being fried.

I don't think we had enough material to argue whether punitive damages are allowed per se. I thought the point was that the Supreme Court case said that errors of law are not grounds to vacate an arbitration. Thus, even if the law doesn't allow for punitive damages, it doesn't matter.

[scrowell]

ha, ha, well there goes that then! i did blab on about the 6th amendment giving the right to testify regardless of what he wants to say, so deny motion. whatever

that's what i said too

[lithoman]

I am terrible at professional responsibility and figure I should know this shit for actual practice. What exactly is a lawyer's duty when he knows a client is about to falsely testify? From what I remember, you have to attempt to dissuade him and then, if he refuses, must withdraw because you know continued employment will result in ethical violations. After that, if you can't withdraw for some reason, you have to disclose to the tribunal (ABA) or ask around it in CA. Correct?

i did, tell him not to perjure himself, try to persuade, try to withraw if not going to delay or prejudice the clients case, the in crim cases have to let him testify, but in narrative fashion. maybe??

i think crim def has right to testify. Ca rules make them testify in narrative fashion if it is a civil case.

This is not my understanding, though I do not have access to my notes right now. I thought that (for CA) in civil cases, you cannot let your client on the stand if you know he is going to perjure himself. If it's a criminal case, you have to put him up and then make them testify in narrative fashion. Under the ABA, you still have to let the defendant testify, but you also have to disclose the perjury to the tribunal (even if it results in violating A/C privilege under crime/fraud exception).