BarBri Bar Review Hangout - July 2015 Exam Forum

[rinkrat19]

I'm sure this has already been discussed, but I didn't want to back through 8 pages... customer service rep informed me that none, zero of the 36 lbs of material will not be covered in the PSP. Meaning no extra problems to practice in my down time. Is this credited? She had a serious attitude and would have said anything to get me off the phone I think...

I don't know what you mean by this.

The PSP is just the schedule by which they're leading you through all that material in the books. I've read or worked in like 5 of the 9 books so far, prompted by assignments in my PSP.

ETA: I totally missed that very important "NOT," so ignore me!

[gk101]

I'm sure this has already been discussed, but I didn't want to back through 8 pages... customer service rep informed me that none, zero of the 36 lbs of material will not be covered in the PSP. Meaning no extra problems to practice in my down time. Is this credited? She had a serious attitude and would have said anything to get me off the phone I think...

If I remember correctly from the last go around, this is correct/ All the questions will be assigned at some point over the summer. No real need to go above and beyond what's assigned

[victortsoi]

im just pissed that im at the 25 percentile in torts because i bombed one set, while acing another that isnt calculated...

[BVest]

9/14% here in Texas. And I'm in Austin which means I'm on a schedule different from everyone else in the state. That said, I've certainly found my strengths/weaknesses so far line up perfectly with my law school grades:

Real Property (highest LS grade): 1 homework assignment (MBE Strategies lecture)
Torts (lowest LS grade): 12 homework assignments

God I hate torts.

Its interesting they've already assigned you Torts and Real Property. I'm doing Texas too and I have come across either yet.

Most subjects, it doesn't matter what order you learn them in. And it might lessen server loads by splitting everyone one so 30,000 people (or whatever) aren't all trying to watch ConLaw on the same day. (Recall how well the Opening Day video worked out.)

It's not that... They announced pretty much last minute (after the April 1 payment deadline) that Austin was going to be video stream only, when it has always been live in the past. A stink was raised and they capitulated. Since the rest of the state is receiving the livestream from Houston and since the professors can't be in two cities at once, our schedule is different. But because Texas started a week later than most other states, and since the Austin presentations are not being streamed to anyone else (they're not even being recorded), our schedule is unique.

Even weirder, if you're in Austin but signed up to take it online, you follow the rest-of-Texas schedule and are totally out of sync with your colleagues in town.

[myrtlewinston]

I submitted my 1st essay for grading (Torts #2). Part of the question was on a topic that neither Schechter nor CriticalPass covered. It was an actual Bar exam question too. So, back to the Conviser for Torts.

[Hutz_and_Goodman]

After listening to the Crim. law lecture today, I'm definitely not happy that there appear to be many important distinctions between NY law and MBE.

[myrtlewinston]

After listening to the Crim. law lecture today, I'm definitely not happy that there appear to be many important distinctions between NY law and MBE.

What do you think of the lecture handouts? Sufficient?

[akarenina]

NY Torts Essay 7 - did anyone else find the BLL in the essay answers to be confusing? I thought it didn't match with what was said in lecture or CMR at times - like CMR says physical manifestation not necessary in emotional distress of bystander - (and more) - any thoughts?

Yeah, I don't understand this either. It wasn't covered sufficiently in the lecture, and I find the explanation in the NY Distinctions Supplement in the CMR unclear. Can anyone explain the distinctions described in the answer to Torts Essay 7?

No one? Hmm I may have to email barbri and see what they say - hopefully something helpful. I'm frustrated with their lack of consistency with the outlines/lecture.

This! I am so glad I'm not the only one. I am similarly frustrated by the inconsistency. Example, re: Graded Essay (#2)... no mention of the joint and several liability limitation in the NY distinctions in Torts in CMR, except a vague note which sends you to another section in NY Practice which hasn't been covered yet, for a random sub-rule, also not mentioned in lecture, which affects the entire second half of the essay. Even for an open book exercise, that's trolling. Thanks Barbri!

That torts that lecturer kinda sucked overall. I did the Barbri Amp MBE Torts lecture (which actually had a handout) and I found that a lot more helpful.

[myrtlewinston]

I had the same problem with Torts 2.

Where do I find the AMP lecture?

[mrs_featherbottom]

NY Torts Essay 7 - did anyone else find the BLL in the essay answers to be confusing? I thought it didn't match with what was said in lecture or CMR at times - like CMR says physical manifestation not necessary in emotional distress of bystander - (and more) - any thoughts?

Yeah, I don't understand this either. It wasn't covered sufficiently in the lecture, and I find the explanation in the NY Distinctions Supplement in the CMR unclear. Can anyone explain the distinctions described in the answer to Torts Essay 7?

No one? Hmm I may have to email barbri and see what they say - hopefully something helpful. I'm frustrated with their lack of consistency with the outlines/lecture.

This! I am so glad I'm not the only one. I am similarly frustrated by the inconsistency. Example, re: Graded Essay (#2)... no mention of the joint and several liability limitation in the NY distinctions in Torts in CMR, except a vague note which sends you to another section in NY Practice which hasn't been covered yet, for a random sub-rule, also not mentioned in lecture, which affects the entire second half of the essay. Even for an open book exercise, that's trolling. Thanks Barbri!

That torts that lecturer kinda sucked overall. I did the Barbri Amp MBE Torts lecture (which actually had a handout) and I found that a lot more helpful.

I had the exact same problem with this essay! I ended up getting too frustrated and looking at the model answer. Even open book, I wouldn't have gotten it. I feel like the torts lecturer really skimmed over joint and several liability/contribution which seems so unhelpful considering half an essay consisted of discussing those rules.

[rhs100]

NY Torts Essay 7 - did anyone else find the BLL in the essay answers to be confusing? I thought it didn't match with what was said in lecture or CMR at times - like CMR says physical manifestation not necessary in emotional distress of bystander - (and more) - any thoughts?

Yeah, I don't understand this either. It wasn't covered sufficiently in the lecture, and I find the explanation in the NY Distinctions Supplement in the CMR unclear. Can anyone explain the distinctions described in the answer to Torts Essay 7?

No one? Hmm I may have to email barbri and see what they say - hopefully something helpful. I'm frustrated with their lack of consistency with the outlines/lecture.

This! I am so glad I'm not the only one. I am similarly frustrated by the inconsistency. Example, re: Graded Essay (#2)... no mention of the joint and several liability limitation in the NY distinctions in Torts in CMR, except a vague note which sends you to another section in NY Practice which hasn't been covered yet, for a random sub-rule, also not mentioned in lecture, which affects the entire second half of the essay. Even for an open book exercise, that's trolling. Thanks Barbri!

That torts that lecturer kinda sucked overall. I did the Barbri Amp MBE Torts lecture (which actually had a handout) and I found that a lot more helpful.

I had the exact same problem with this essay! I ended up getting too frustrated and looking at the model answer. Even open book, I wouldn't have gotten it. I feel like the torts lecturer really skimmed over joint and several liability/contribution which seems so unhelpful considering half an essay consisted of discussing those rules.

Oh I don't even want to think about my pain and suffering doing that Essay #2 yesterday - I got so frustrated that I derailed from writing the essay and started researching all sorts of law related to this stuff - and there I was 3 FREAKING hours later submitting the essay. Still very hard to figure out what the correct answer should have been. The official NYS answers have two samples and both have different answers/analysis. Lecture, CMR (Tort/NYPRac), big outline, nothing is helpful. Arrghh. And when did we even cover gross negligence?

[myrtlewinston]

That essay question makes me feel like I have to go over the Cnot-soMiniR again. And I don't have time!

[victortsoi]

yup, nothing on gross negligence, i had to really bend my brain to figure out if reckless behavior was or was not "intentional" for the purpose of the question....guess it was. Very unclear.

[michael2015]

Super excited to find out what anyone hears wrt zone of danger and essay 7. I was almost feeling like not a complete idiot until that one happened

[Benjamin1987]

9/14% here in Texas. And I'm in Austin which means I'm on a schedule different from everyone else in the state. That said, I've certainly found my strengths/weaknesses so far line up perfectly with my law school grades:

Real Property (highest LS grade): 1 homework assignment (MBE Strategies lecture)
Torts (lowest LS grade): 12 homework assignments

God I hate torts.

Its interesting they've already assigned you Torts and Real Property. I'm doing Texas too and I have come across either yet.

Most subjects, it doesn't matter what order you learn them in. And it might lessen server loads by splitting everyone one so 30,000 people (or whatever) aren't all trying to watch ConLaw on the same day. (Recall how well the Opening Day video worked out.)

It's not that... They announced pretty much last minute (after the April 1 payment deadline) that Austin was going to be video stream only, when it has always been live in the past. A stink was raised and they capitulated. Since the rest of the state is receiving the livestream from Houston and since the professors can't be in two cities at once, our schedule is different. But because Texas started a week later than most other states, and since the Austin presentations are not being streamed to anyone else (they're not even being recorded), our schedule is unique.

Even weirder, if you're in Austin but signed up to take it online, you follow the rest-of-Texas schedule and are totally out of sync with your colleagues in town.

tldr - I'm just going to blindly follow PSP into the night and stopping using my brain for anything other than flash cards. Here's to hoping they know what they are doing...

[Benjamin1987]

9/14% here in Texas. And I'm in Austin which means I'm on a schedule different from everyone else in the state. That said, I've certainly found my strengths/weaknesses so far line up perfectly with my law school grades:

Real Property (highest LS grade): 1 homework assignment (MBE Strategies lecture)
Torts (lowest LS grade): 12 homework assignments

God I hate torts.

Its interesting they've already assigned you Torts and Real Property. I'm doing Texas too and I have come across either yet.

Most subjects, it doesn't matter what order you learn them in. And it might lessen server loads by splitting everyone one so 30,000 people (or whatever) aren't all trying to watch ConLaw on the same day. (Recall how well the Opening Day video worked out.)

It's not that... They announced pretty much last minute (after the April 1 payment deadline) that Austin was going to be video stream only, when it has always been live in the past. A stink was raised and they capitulated. Since the rest of the state is receiving the livestream from Houston and since the professors can't be in two cities at once, our schedule is different. But because Texas started a week later than most other states, and since the Austin presentations are not being streamed to anyone else (they're not even being recorded), our schedule is unique.

Even weirder, if you're in Austin but signed up to take it online, you follow the rest-of-Texas schedule and are totally out of sync with your colleagues in town.

tldr - I'm just going to blindly follow PSP into the night and stop using my brain for anything other than flash cards. Here's to hoping they know what they are doing...

[akarenina]

I had the same problem with Torts 2.

Where do I find the AMP lecture?

If you go to the settings option in Personal Study Plan then go to "Studysmart MBE" then "Early Start Bar Review" on the left, they have MBE lectures for each topic with handouts. I think that lecturer for torts and the handout was better, and I just supplemented it with the NY distinctions in CMR. Most of the other NY lecturers haven't been too bad so far at least. But these essays... sheesh.

[mushybrain]

Erwin is kinda soothing, even at 1.5x.

[EvelynS]

I got really frustrated with the graded essay. Exactly half of these questions were not even covered in either CMR, lecture, NY distinctions, or big multistate book on torts. I literally googled it and wrote my answer using my google search. I made a note to the grader saying that you better give me a damn reference to the barbri materials that cover that topic. I don't think that grader will really care, but I had to try...after dropping so much money on barbri, I expect them to give me all the info i need (I guess I am spoiled. lol).

[mushybrain]

Property diagnostic --> 19 new homework assignments. LOL.

[myrtlewinston]

I had the same problem with Torts 2.

Where do I find the AMP lecture?

If you go to the settings option in Personal Study Plan then go to "Studysmart MBE" then "Early Start Bar Review" on the left, they have MBE lectures for each topic with handouts. I think that lecturer for torts and the handout was better, and I just supplemented it with the NY distinctions in CMR. Most of the other NY lecturers haven't been too bad so far at least. But these essays... sheesh.

Thank you! Barbri should have put that lecture on our schedules instead of whatshisface.

[myrtlewinston]

Re: Torts Essay 2

Are you all saying that, even if I had read all the Barbri material, I would not have found the relevant law?

[myrtlewinston]

Re: Torts Essay 2

Are you all saying that, even if I had read all the Barbri material, I would not have found the relevant law?

[EvelynS]

Re: Torts Essay 2

Are you all saying that, even if I had read all the Barbri material, I would not have found the relevant law?

I was referring to barbri materials related to torts ONLY!!! I think it should be somewhere in NY practice specific topics, but I was not able to locate it (it was faster just to google it). At least I hope that it should be somewhere in the barbri materials.

[goldeneye]

How confident should I be that Chemerinsky for Conlaw said that his lecture outline takes topics mentioned on every bar exam since the 60s. Should I stick with learning that or supplement and add from the CMR?