July 2013 supposedly had a generous curve because either one or both PTs were super difficult. I thought these were tough, but I'm not sure if they were as difficult as July 2013BuenAbogado wrote:
PT A - Very hard, although if you wrote it in a responsive fashion, i.e. show that you clearly are addressing only the points that they brought up, you will be WAYYYYYYYYYYYY ahead of the pack. Many people I spoke with had no clue how to structure it, and/or did a freestyle.
PT B - Not sure how I did. I think I messed up by addressing remedies under each of the two issues, rather than make one entire section for remedies. Also I should have probably had a section for Applicable Law AND Facts rather than have them as two separate headings.
If I fail this exam, it will be because of the PTs.
July 2015 California Bar Exam Forum
Forum rules
Anonymous Posting
Anonymous posting is only appropriate when you are sharing sensitive information about bar exam prep. You may anonymously respond on topic to these threads. Unacceptable uses include: harassing another user, joking around, testing the feature, or other things that are more appropriate in the lounge.
Failure to follow these rules will get you outed, warned, or banned."
Anonymous Posting
Anonymous posting is only appropriate when you are sharing sensitive information about bar exam prep. You may anonymously respond on topic to these threads. Unacceptable uses include: harassing another user, joking around, testing the feature, or other things that are more appropriate in the lounge.
Failure to follow these rules will get you outed, warned, or banned."
-
- Posts: 63
- Joined: Thu Dec 18, 2008 5:28 pm
Re: July 2015 California Bar Exam
- BuenAbogado
- Posts: 237
- Joined: Sun Jul 05, 2015 3:43 pm
Re: July 2015 California Bar Exam
There will be a high curve this time because of the Takings and Corporations questions.injun wrote:July 2013 supposedly had a generous curve because either one or both PTs were super difficult. I thought these were tough, but I'm not sure if they were as difficult as July 2013BuenAbogado wrote:
PT A - Very hard, although if you wrote it in a responsive fashion, i.e. show that you clearly are addressing only the points that they brought up, you will be WAYYYYYYYYYYYY ahead of the pack. Many people I spoke with had no clue how to structure it, and/or did a freestyle.
PT B - Not sure how I did. I think I messed up by addressing remedies under each of the two issues, rather than make one entire section for remedies. Also I should have probably had a section for Applicable Law AND Facts rather than have them as two separate headings.
If I fail this exam, it will be because of the PTs.
Last time they had an obscure topic (Presidential Powers), it had one of the highest passing rates ever.
-
- Posts: 270
- Joined: Mon Apr 22, 2013 11:24 pm
Re: July 2015 California Bar Exam
I hope you are right, good sir.BuenAbogado wrote:There will be a high curve this time because of the Takings and Corporations questions.injun wrote:July 2013 supposedly had a generous curve because either one or both PTs were super difficult. I thought these were tough, but I'm not sure if they were as difficult as July 2013BuenAbogado wrote:
PT A - Very hard, although if you wrote it in a responsive fashion, i.e. show that you clearly are addressing only the points that they brought up, you will be WAYYYYYYYYYYYY ahead of the pack. Many people I spoke with had no clue how to structure it, and/or did a freestyle.
PT B - Not sure how I did. I think I messed up by addressing remedies under each of the two issues, rather than make one entire section for remedies. Also I should have probably had a section for Applicable Law AND Facts rather than have them as two separate headings.
If I fail this exam, it will be because of the PTs.
Last time they had an obscure topic (Presidential Powers), it had one of the highest passing rates ever.
-
- Posts: 177
- Joined: Thu Dec 30, 2010 2:33 pm
Re: July 2015 California Bar Exam
I did the same for PTA. I wouldn't call that BS, I seem to remember that the Plaintiff's response was basically an inversion of the prior headings. That was my reasoning for organizing it that way.tmanix wrote:My sentiments exactly.BuenAbogado wrote:PT A - Very hard, although if you wrote it in a responsive fashion, i.e. show that you clearly are addressing only the points that they brought up, you will be WAYYYYYYYYYYYY ahead of the pack. Many people I spoke with had no clue how to structure it, and/or did a freestyle.injun wrote:I had my C&F application approved before the July 2014 CBX. I got something similar about a month ago... it requested that I submit any updates to my C&F profile, if i had any. Based on the form, I didn't have anything to add. I ended up getting a confirmation letter from the bar a few weeks later. I don't think the C&F stuff has anything to do with the exam, so I would not stress out about it.
I was wondering what you guys thought about the PTs. Did anyone think the both PTA and PTB were more difficult than previous years?
PT B - Not sure how I did. I think I messed up by addressing remedies under each of the two issues, rather than make one entire section for remedies. Also I should have probably had a section for Applicable Law AND Facts rather than have them as two separate headings.
If I fail this exam, it will be because of the PTs.
For PT A, I inverted the headings from Plaintiff's opposition and used those to organize my answer. Hopefully the graders don't see through my BS.
I don't even remember what my answer to PT B look like 'cos I just kept writing until proctor called time. Also the fact that the PT B memo was addressed to a lay audience just made me super slow. I definitely skimped over the remedies analysis in PTB. Here's to hoping for the best.
For PTB, I remember feeling like I couldn't have really changed much for a lay person audience. I definitely used legal vocabulary, but I explained the concepts in plain English. Anyone else feel that way?
- kjartan
- Posts: 1554
- Joined: Thu Oct 02, 2014 12:49 am
Re: July 2015 California Bar Exam
Yeah, honestly, idk how good a job I did writing to a lay audience.
Want to continue reading?
Register now to search topics and post comments!
Absolutely FREE!
Already a member? Login
- petsoundspop
- Posts: 50
- Joined: Wed Jun 25, 2008 7:17 pm
Re: July 2015 California Bar Exam
I seriously believe that both PT-A and the corporations essay were insanely difficult. I definitely reviewed a lot of PTs before the exam and didn't really see much that matched that first PT in terms of difficulty. Maybe I'm alone in that. Also, the fact that I found myself not writing very much threw me off my game because I was used to filling up the entire three hours on the practice PTs. As for the corporations essay, that was the biggest middle finger they could have given to us. Both left me very frazzled and destroyed my confidence about passing. However, I'm hoping there is a generous curve on this one because the thought of taking this thing again doesn't even compute at this point.injun wrote:July 2013 supposedly had a generous curve because either one or both PTs were super difficult. I thought these were tough, but I'm not sure if they were as difficult as July 2013BuenAbogado wrote:
PT A - Very hard, although if you wrote it in a responsive fashion, i.e. show that you clearly are addressing only the points that they brought up, you will be WAYYYYYYYYYYYY ahead of the pack. Many people I spoke with had no clue how to structure it, and/or did a freestyle.
PT B - Not sure how I did. I think I messed up by addressing remedies under each of the two issues, rather than make one entire section for remedies. Also I should have probably had a section for Applicable Law AND Facts rather than have them as two separate headings.
If I fail this exam, it will be because of the PTs.
- BuenAbogado
- Posts: 237
- Joined: Sun Jul 05, 2015 3:43 pm
Re: July 2015 California Bar Exam
What about the corp essay did you find hard?petsoundspop wrote:I seriously believe that both PT-A and the corporations essay were insanely difficult. I definitely reviewed a lot of PTs before the exam and didn't really see much that matched that first PT in terms of difficulty. Maybe I'm alone in that. Also, the fact that I found myself not writing very much threw me off my game because I was used to filling up the entire three hours on the practice PTs. As for the corporations essay, that was the biggest middle finger they could have given to us. Both left me very frazzled and destroyed my confidence about passing. However, I'm hoping there is a generous curve on this one because the thought of taking this thing again doesn't even compute at this point.injun wrote:July 2013 supposedly had a generous curve because either one or both PTs were super difficult. I thought these were tough, but I'm not sure if they were as difficult as July 2013BuenAbogado wrote:
PT A - Very hard, although if you wrote it in a responsive fashion, i.e. show that you clearly are addressing only the points that they brought up, you will be WAYYYYYYYYYYYY ahead of the pack. Many people I spoke with had no clue how to structure it, and/or did a freestyle.
PT B - Not sure how I did. I think I messed up by addressing remedies under each of the two issues, rather than make one entire section for remedies. Also I should have probably had a section for Applicable Law AND Facts rather than have them as two separate headings.
If I fail this exam, it will be because of the PTs.
-
- Posts: 270
- Joined: Mon Apr 22, 2013 11:24 pm
Re: July 2015 California Bar Exam
What the best/most assuring one time calculator score combo you guys came up with?
I Just pulled this one out that made me smile
Essay 1 (civ pro): 65
Essay 2 (Real Prop): 65
Essay 3 (crim pro): 60
Essay 4 (Comm prop.): 65
Essay 5 (bullshit cross of Corp./Ethics): 55
Essay 6: (bullshit takings?/conlaw?): 60
PT A: 60
PT B: 65
Raw MBE: 126
FINAL SCORE-->1440 = PASS
This is a very conservative estimate of scores. I feel really good about real property and CP, so not getting a 70+ on at least one would be a surprise.
I Just pulled this one out that made me smile
Essay 1 (civ pro): 65
Essay 2 (Real Prop): 65
Essay 3 (crim pro): 60
Essay 4 (Comm prop.): 65
Essay 5 (bullshit cross of Corp./Ethics): 55
Essay 6: (bullshit takings?/conlaw?): 60
PT A: 60
PT B: 65
Raw MBE: 126
FINAL SCORE-->1440 = PASS
This is a very conservative estimate of scores. I feel really good about real property and CP, so not getting a 70+ on at least one would be a surprise.
-
- Posts: 63
- Joined: Thu Dec 18, 2008 5:28 pm
Re: July 2015 California Bar Exam
Was thinking about that CP essay the other day....anyone mention Hugg and Nelson? I put them down, but as I was analyzing it, the math didn't make sense. I think I ended up concluding that it was CP with each getting 1/2mike.alexander23 wrote:What the best/most assuring one time calculator score combo you guys came up with?
I Just pulled this one out that made me smile
Essay 1 (civ pro): 65
Essay 2 (Real Prop): 65
Essay 3 (crim pro): 60
Essay 4 (Comm prop.): 65
Essay 5 (bullshit cross of Corp./Ethics): 55
Essay 6: (bullshit takings?/conlaw?): 60
PT A: 60
PT B: 65
Raw MBE: 126
FINAL SCORE-->1440 = PASS
This is a very conservative estimate of scores. I feel really good about real property and CP, so not getting a 70+ on at least one would be a surprise.
- petsoundspop
- Posts: 50
- Joined: Wed Jun 25, 2008 7:17 pm
Re: July 2015 California Bar Exam
I think just the sheer number of issues to address. There was so much going on in the fact pattern that I had trouble keeping it all together and keeping my time reasonable. By the time I got to the PR part of the question I was really low on time. I felt that there was way too much going on in that essay to really address in an hour.BuenAbogado wrote:What about the corp essay did you find hard?petsoundspop wrote:I seriously believe that both PT-A and the corporations essay were insanely difficult. I definitely reviewed a lot of PTs before the exam and didn't really see much that matched that first PT in terms of difficulty. Maybe I'm alone in that. Also, the fact that I found myself not writing very much threw me off my game because I was used to filling up the entire three hours on the practice PTs. As for the corporations essay, that was the biggest middle finger they could have given to us. Both left me very frazzled and destroyed my confidence about passing. However, I'm hoping there is a generous curve on this one because the thought of taking this thing again doesn't even compute at this point.injun wrote:July 2013 supposedly had a generous curve because either one or both PTs were super difficult. I thought these were tough, but I'm not sure if they were as difficult as July 2013BuenAbogado wrote:
PT A - Very hard, although if you wrote it in a responsive fashion, i.e. show that you clearly are addressing only the points that they brought up, you will be WAYYYYYYYYYYYY ahead of the pack. Many people I spoke with had no clue how to structure it, and/or did a freestyle.
PT B - Not sure how I did. I think I messed up by addressing remedies under each of the two issues, rather than make one entire section for remedies. Also I should have probably had a section for Applicable Law AND Facts rather than have them as two separate headings.
If I fail this exam, it will be because of the PTs.
- robinhoodOO
- Posts: 876
- Joined: Wed Mar 16, 2011 1:08 pm
Re: July 2015 California Bar Exam
Wouldn't it just be 25% SP and 75% CP split, based on the fact that they were, in part, for past performance? So, using those percentages, H gets $30K and W gets $50K (her 25% SP ($20K) for the last year, plus her 1/2 CP--which is half of $60K, which is $30K).injun wrote:Was thinking about that CP essay the other day....anyone mention Hugg and Nelson? I put them down, but as I was analyzing it, the math didn't make sense. I think I ended up concluding that it was CP with each getting 1/2mike.alexander23 wrote:What the best/most assuring one time calculator score combo you guys came up with?
I Just pulled this one out that made me smile
Essay 1 (civ pro): 65
Essay 2 (Real Prop): 65
Essay 3 (crim pro): 60
Essay 4 (Comm prop.): 65
Essay 5 (bullshit cross of Corp./Ethics): 55
Essay 6: (bullshit takings?/conlaw?): 60
PT A: 60
PT B: 65
Raw MBE: 126
FINAL SCORE-->1440 = PASS
This is a very conservative estimate of scores. I feel really good about real property and CP, so not getting a 70+ on at least one would be a surprise.
I'm pretty sure that's what I did, but I could be wrong on all counts.
Last edited by robinhoodOO on Mon Nov 16, 2015 6:16 pm, edited 1 time in total.
-
- Posts: 270
- Joined: Mon Apr 22, 2013 11:24 pm
Re: July 2015 California Bar Exam
I didn't mention the formula by name but I think I ultimately concluded they were CP because it was for her "great performance" over the course of the marriage, or something like that. But yeah, I concluded Stock options were CP, as wellinjun wrote:Was thinking about that CP essay the other day....anyone mention Hugg and Nelson? I put them down, but as I was analyzing it, the math didn't make sense. I think I ended up concluding that it was CP with each getting 1/2mike.alexander23 wrote:What the best/most assuring one time calculator score combo you guys came up with?
I Just pulled this one out that made me smile
Essay 1 (civ pro): 65
Essay 2 (Real Prop): 65
Essay 3 (crim pro): 60
Essay 4 (Comm prop.): 65
Essay 5 (bullshit cross of Corp./Ethics): 55
Essay 6: (bullshit takings?/conlaw?): 60
PT A: 60
PT B: 65
Raw MBE: 126
FINAL SCORE-->1440 = PASS
This is a very conservative estimate of scores. I feel really good about real property and CP, so not getting a 70+ on at least one would be a surprise.
-
- Posts: 270
- Joined: Mon Apr 22, 2013 11:24 pm
Re: July 2015 California Bar Exam
Disregard my last post. This is similar to what I concluded. I'm a mess.robinhoodOO wrote:Wouldn't it just be 25% SP and 75% CP split, based on the fact that they were, in part, for past performance? So, using those percentages, H gets $30K and W gets $50K (her 25% SP for the last year, plus her 1/2 CP--which is half of $60K; $20K + $30K).injun wrote:Was thinking about that CP essay the other day....anyone mention Hugg and Nelson? I put them down, but as I was analyzing it, the math didn't make sense. I think I ended up concluding that it was CP with each getting 1/2mike.alexander23 wrote:What the best/most assuring one time calculator score combo you guys came up with?
I Just pulled this one out that made me smile
Essay 1 (civ pro): 65
Essay 2 (Real Prop): 65
Essay 3 (crim pro): 60
Essay 4 (Comm prop.): 65
Essay 5 (bullshit cross of Corp./Ethics): 55
Essay 6: (bullshit takings?/conlaw?): 60
PT A: 60
PT B: 65
Raw MBE: 126
FINAL SCORE-->1440 = PASS
This is a very conservative estimate of scores. I feel really good about real property and CP, so not getting a 70+ on at least one would be a surprise.
I'm pretty sure that's what I did, but I could be wrong on all counts.
Register now!
Resources to assist law school applicants, students & graduates.
It's still FREE!
Already a member? Login
-
- Posts: 63
- Joined: Thu Dec 18, 2008 5:28 pm
Re: July 2015 California Bar Exam
Guess I messed that up, whoopsmike.alexander23 wrote:Disregard my last post. This is similar to what I concluded. I'm a mess.robinhoodOO wrote:Wouldn't it just be 25% SP and 75% CP split, based on the fact that they were, in part, for past performance? So, using those percentages, H gets $30K and W gets $50K (her 25% SP for the last year, plus her 1/2 CP--which is half of $60K; $20K + $30K).injun wrote:Was thinking about that CP essay the other day....anyone mention Hugg and Nelson? I put them down, but as I was analyzing it, the math didn't make sense. I think I ended up concluding that it was CP with each getting 1/2mike.alexander23 wrote:What the best/most assuring one time calculator score combo you guys came up with?
I Just pulled this one out that made me smile
Essay 1 (civ pro): 65
Essay 2 (Real Prop): 65
Essay 3 (crim pro): 60
Essay 4 (Comm prop.): 65
Essay 5 (bullshit cross of Corp./Ethics): 55
Essay 6: (bullshit takings?/conlaw?): 60
PT A: 60
PT B: 65
Raw MBE: 126
FINAL SCORE-->1440 = PASS
This is a very conservative estimate of scores. I feel really good about real property and CP, so not getting a 70+ on at least one would be a surprise.
I'm pretty sure that's what I did, but I could be wrong on all counts.
- tmanix
- Posts: 31
- Joined: Wed Sep 09, 2015 7:42 pm
Re: July 2015 California Bar Exam
I'm no expert but I used the Nelson formula.robinhoodOO wrote:Wouldn't it just be 25% SP and 75% CP split, based on the fact that they were, in part, for past performance? So, using those percentages, H gets $30K and W gets $50K (her 25% SP ($20K) for the last year, plus her 1/2 CP--which is half of $60K, which is $30K).injun wrote:Was thinking about that CP essay the other day....anyone mention Hugg and Nelson? I put them down, but as I was analyzing it, the math didn't make sense. I think I ended up concluding that it was CP with each getting 1/2mike.alexander23 wrote:What the best/most assuring one time calculator score combo you guys came up with?
I Just pulled this one out that made me smile
Essay 1 (civ pro): 65
Essay 2 (Real Prop): 65
Essay 3 (crim pro): 60
Essay 4 (Comm prop.): 65
Essay 5 (bullshit cross of Corp./Ethics): 55
Essay 6: (bullshit takings?/conlaw?): 60
PT A: 60
PT B: 65
Raw MBE: 126
FINAL SCORE-->1440 = PASS
This is a very conservative estimate of scores. I feel really good about real property and CP, so not getting a 70+ on at least one would be a surprise.
I'm pretty sure that's what I did, but I could be wrong on all counts.
The Nelson formula is used where the options were primarily intended as compensation for future performance and as an incentive to stay with the company. The formula used in Nelson is:
DOG – DOS
----------------- x Number of shares exercisable = Community Property Shares
DOG - DOE
(DOG = Date of Grant; DOS = Date of Separation; DOE = Date of Exercisability).
Using the above formula:
2012 - 2013
-------------- x $80, 000.00
2012-2014
1
---- x $80, 000.00 = $40, 000.00 (community property).
2
2012-2014
Therefore, wife keeps 40k as separate property and takes 20k as her share of CP. Wife's total is $60k. Husband takes 20k as his share of CP.
I didn't use the Hugg formula 'cos Hugg is used in cases where the options were primarily intended to attract the employee to the job and reward past services. The Hypo of course wasn't very clear on this issue because first it said: "In 2010, Wendy accepted a job at Company. At that time, she was told that if she performed well, she would receive stock options in the near future." Then it later said "In 2012, Wendy was granted stock options by Company, which would become exercisable in 2014, in part because she had been a very effective employee." It is therefore an arguable question as to which formula applies.
But maybe we were expected to do a detailed analysis here, i.e. Husband would want Hugg to be used cos he gets $30k and wife gets 50k. Wife would want Nelson 'cos she gets 60k while husband gets only 20k. Who had time for that with the Q5 and Q6 staring one in the face?
- BuenAbogado
- Posts: 237
- Joined: Sun Jul 05, 2015 3:43 pm
Re: July 2015 California Bar Exam
There is no "she" in marriage. She is merely an arm of the community. So the fact that "she" had been an effective employee actually translates to "the community had been an effective employee". Thus, the community earned this. Thus, Hugg. Although a quick analysis of Nelson always helps, but as you alluded to, aint nobody got time fo' dat.tmanix wrote:I'm no expert but I used the Nelson formula.robinhoodOO wrote:Wouldn't it just be 25% SP and 75% CP split, based on the fact that they were, in part, for past performance? So, using those percentages, H gets $30K and W gets $50K (her 25% SP ($20K) for the last year, plus her 1/2 CP--which is half of $60K, which is $30K).injun wrote:Was thinking about that CP essay the other day....anyone mention Hugg and Nelson? I put them down, but as I was analyzing it, the math didn't make sense. I think I ended up concluding that it was CP with each getting 1/2mike.alexander23 wrote:What the best/most assuring one time calculator score combo you guys came up with?
I Just pulled this one out that made me smile
Essay 1 (civ pro): 65
Essay 2 (Real Prop): 65
Essay 3 (crim pro): 60
Essay 4 (Comm prop.): 65
Essay 5 (bullshit cross of Corp./Ethics): 55
Essay 6: (bullshit takings?/conlaw?): 60
PT A: 60
PT B: 65
Raw MBE: 126
FINAL SCORE-->1440 = PASS
This is a very conservative estimate of scores. I feel really good about real property and CP, so not getting a 70+ on at least one would be a surprise.
I'm pretty sure that's what I did, but I could be wrong on all counts.
The Nelson formula is used where the options were primarily intended as compensation for future performance and as an incentive to stay with the company. The formula used in Nelson is:
DOG – DOS
----------------- x Number of shares exercisable = Community Property Shares
DOG - DOE
(DOG = Date of Grant; DOS = Date of Separation; DOE = Date of Exercisability).
Using the above formula:
2012 - 2013
-------------- x $80, 000.00
2012-2014
1
---- x $80, 000.00 = $40, 000.00 (community property).
2
2012-2014
Therefore, wife keeps 40k as separate property and takes 20k as her share of CP. Wife's total is $60k. Husband takes 20k as his share of CP.
I didn't use the Hugg formula 'cos Hugg is used in cases where the options were primarily intended to attract the employee to the job and reward past services. The Hypo of course wasn't very clear on this issue because first it said: "In 2010, Wendy accepted a job at Company. At that time, she was told that if she performed well, she would receive stock options in the near future." Then it later said "In 2012, Wendy was granted stock options by Company, which would become exercisable in 2014, in part because she had been a very effective employee." It is therefore an arguable question as to which formula applies.
But maybe we were expected to do a detailed analysis here, i.e. Husband would want Hugg to be used cos he gets $30k and wife gets 50k. Wife would want Nelson 'cos she gets 60k while husband gets only 20k. Who had time for that with the Q5 and Q6 staring one in the face?
- Raiden
- Posts: 410
- Joined: Wed Jul 25, 2012 8:11 pm
Re: July 2015 California Bar Exam
How in the world do you guys remember what you wrote on these essays.BuenAbogado wrote:There is no "she" in marriage. She is merely an arm of the community. So the fact that "she" had been an effective employee actually translates to "the community had been an effective employee". Thus, the community earned this. Thus, Hugg. Although a quick analysis of Nelson always helps, but as you alluded to, aint nobody got time fo' dat.tmanix wrote:I'm no expert but I used the Nelson formula.robinhoodOO wrote:Wouldn't it just be 25% SP and 75% CP split, based on the fact that they were, in part, for past performance? So, using those percentages, H gets $30K and W gets $50K (her 25% SP ($20K) for the last year, plus her 1/2 CP--which is half of $60K, which is $30K).injun wrote:Was thinking about that CP essay the other day....anyone mention Hugg and Nelson? I put them down, but as I was analyzing it, the math didn't make sense. I think I ended up concluding that it was CP with each getting 1/2mike.alexander23 wrote:What the best/most assuring one time calculator score combo you guys came up with?
I Just pulled this one out that made me smile
Essay 1 (civ pro): 65
Essay 2 (Real Prop): 65
Essay 3 (crim pro): 60
Essay 4 (Comm prop.): 65
Essay 5 (bullshit cross of Corp./Ethics): 55
Essay 6: (bullshit takings?/conlaw?): 60
PT A: 60
PT B: 65
Raw MBE: 126
FINAL SCORE-->1440 = PASS
This is a very conservative estimate of scores. I feel really good about real property and CP, so not getting a 70+ on at least one would be a surprise.
I'm pretty sure that's what I did, but I could be wrong on all counts.
The Nelson formula is used where the options were primarily intended as compensation for future performance and as an incentive to stay with the company. The formula used in Nelson is:
DOG – DOS
----------------- x Number of shares exercisable = Community Property Shares
DOG - DOE
(DOG = Date of Grant; DOS = Date of Separation; DOE = Date of Exercisability).
Using the above formula:
2012 - 2013
-------------- x $80, 000.00
2012-2014
1
---- x $80, 000.00 = $40, 000.00 (community property).
2
2012-2014
Therefore, wife keeps 40k as separate property and takes 20k as her share of CP. Wife's total is $60k. Husband takes 20k as his share of CP.
I didn't use the Hugg formula 'cos Hugg is used in cases where the options were primarily intended to attract the employee to the job and reward past services. The Hypo of course wasn't very clear on this issue because first it said: "In 2010, Wendy accepted a job at Company. At that time, she was told that if she performed well, she would receive stock options in the near future." Then it later said "In 2012, Wendy was granted stock options by Company, which would become exercisable in 2014, in part because she had been a very effective employee." It is therefore an arguable question as to which formula applies.
But maybe we were expected to do a detailed analysis here, i.e. Husband would want Hugg to be used cos he gets $30k and wife gets 50k. Wife would want Nelson 'cos she gets 60k while husband gets only 20k. Who had time for that with the Q5 and Q6 staring one in the face?
Get unlimited access to all forums and topics
Register now!
I'm pretty sure I told you it's FREE...
Already a member? Login
- robinhoodOO
- Posts: 876
- Joined: Wed Mar 16, 2011 1:08 pm
Re: July 2015 California Bar Exam
I'm very confident that whichever path you took, you'd get full credit for that issue. Probably a bonus point for stating both, but nothing to worry about if not (I certainly didn't).tmanix wrote:I didn't use the Hugg formula 'cos Hugg is used in cases where the options were primarily intended to attract the employee to the job and reward past services. The Hypo of course wasn't very clear on this issue because first it said: "In 2010, Wendy accepted a job at Company. At that time, she was told that if she performed well, she would receive stock options in the near future." Then it later said "In 2012, Wendy was granted stock options by Company, which would become exercisable in 2014, in part because she had been a very effective employee." It is therefore an arguable question as to which formula applies.
But maybe we were expected to do a detailed analysis here, i.e. Husband would want Hugg to be used cos he gets $30k and wife gets 50k. Wife would want Nelson 'cos she gets 60k while husband gets only 20k. Who had time for that with the Q5 and Q6 staring one in the face?
As for Q's 5 and 6, haha, well I finished Q4 in 40 minutes, went to the restroom and then read Q5. Q5 took me roughly 1 hour and 20 minutes. Of every Essay I read and answered in preparation, it was by far the hardest I've seen HANDS DOWN. Could not be finished in an hour (period). Hell, I still didn't "finish" it in 80 minutes. That left me with around 50-55 minutes for Q6, which just left a bad taste in my mouth.
-
- Posts: 171
- Joined: Mon Jan 02, 2012 10:36 pm
Re: July 2015 California Bar Exam
Yeah, I looked ahead and knew that I did not have the goods on Q6 at all, so I spent like an hour 40 on Q5 and still don't feel like I finished. RidiculousrobinhoodOO wrote:I'm very confident that whichever path you took, you'd get full credit for that issue. Probably a bonus point for stating both, but nothing to worry about if not (I certainly didn't).tmanix wrote:I didn't use the Hugg formula 'cos Hugg is used in cases where the options were primarily intended to attract the employee to the job and reward past services. The Hypo of course wasn't very clear on this issue because first it said: "In 2010, Wendy accepted a job at Company. At that time, she was told that if she performed well, she would receive stock options in the near future." Then it later said "In 2012, Wendy was granted stock options by Company, which would become exercisable in 2014, in part because she had been a very effective employee." It is therefore an arguable question as to which formula applies.
But maybe we were expected to do a detailed analysis here, i.e. Husband would want Hugg to be used cos he gets $30k and wife gets 50k. Wife would want Nelson 'cos she gets 60k while husband gets only 20k. Who had time for that with the Q5 and Q6 staring one in the face?
As for Q's 5 and 6, haha, well I finished Q4 in 40 minutes, went to the restroom and then read Q5. Q5 took me roughly 1 hour and 20 minutes. Of every Essay I read and answered in preparation, it was by far the hardest I've seen HANDS DOWN. Could not be finished in an hour (period). Hell, I still didn't "finish" it in 80 minutes. That left me with around 50-55 minutes for Q6, which just left a bad taste in my mouth.
- robinhoodOO
- Posts: 876
- Joined: Wed Mar 16, 2011 1:08 pm
Re: July 2015 California Bar Exam
The guy who runs the bar prep company that did a "debriefing" on the essays said Q5 was very hard and went so far as to apologize for how difficult it must have been during the exam. That's saying something, in addition to everyone I've spoken with saying they it took them more than an hour. Here's hoping that helps whatever curve is present! hahak5220 wrote:Yeah, I looked ahead and knew that I did not have the goods on Q6 at all, so I spent like an hour 40 on Q5 and still don't feel like I finished. Ridiculous
- BuenAbogado
- Posts: 237
- Joined: Sun Jul 05, 2015 3:43 pm
Re: July 2015 California Bar Exam
By memorizing what we wrote on themRaiden wrote:How in the world do you guys remember what you wrote on these essays.BuenAbogado wrote:There is no "she" in marriage. She is merely an arm of the community. So the fact that "she" had been an effective employee actually translates to "the community had been an effective employee". Thus, the community earned this. Thus, Hugg. Although a quick analysis of Nelson always helps, but as you alluded to, aint nobody got time fo' dat.tmanix wrote:I'm no expert but I used the Nelson formula.robinhoodOO wrote:Wouldn't it just be 25% SP and 75% CP split, based on the fact that they were, in part, for past performance? So, using those percentages, H gets $30K and W gets $50K (her 25% SP ($20K) for the last year, plus her 1/2 CP--which is half of $60K, which is $30K).injun wrote:Was thinking about that CP essay the other day....anyone mention Hugg and Nelson? I put them down, but as I was analyzing it, the math didn't make sense. I think I ended up concluding that it was CP with each getting 1/2mike.alexander23 wrote:What the best/most assuring one time calculator score combo you guys came up with?
I Just pulled this one out that made me smile
Essay 1 (civ pro): 65
Essay 2 (Real Prop): 65
Essay 3 (crim pro): 60
Essay 4 (Comm prop.): 65
Essay 5 (bullshit cross of Corp./Ethics): 55
Essay 6: (bullshit takings?/conlaw?): 60
PT A: 60
PT B: 65
Raw MBE: 126
FINAL SCORE-->1440 = PASS
This is a very conservative estimate of scores. I feel really good about real property and CP, so not getting a 70+ on at least one would be a surprise.
I'm pretty sure that's what I did, but I could be wrong on all counts.
The Nelson formula is used where the options were primarily intended as compensation for future performance and as an incentive to stay with the company. The formula used in Nelson is:
DOG – DOS
----------------- x Number of shares exercisable = Community Property Shares
DOG - DOE
(DOG = Date of Grant; DOS = Date of Separation; DOE = Date of Exercisability).
Using the above formula:
2012 - 2013
-------------- x $80, 000.00
2012-2014
1
---- x $80, 000.00 = $40, 000.00 (community property).
2
2012-2014
Therefore, wife keeps 40k as separate property and takes 20k as her share of CP. Wife's total is $60k. Husband takes 20k as his share of CP.
I didn't use the Hugg formula 'cos Hugg is used in cases where the options were primarily intended to attract the employee to the job and reward past services. The Hypo of course wasn't very clear on this issue because first it said: "In 2010, Wendy accepted a job at Company. At that time, she was told that if she performed well, she would receive stock options in the near future." Then it later said "In 2012, Wendy was granted stock options by Company, which would become exercisable in 2014, in part because she had been a very effective employee." It is therefore an arguable question as to which formula applies.
But maybe we were expected to do a detailed analysis here, i.e. Husband would want Hugg to be used cos he gets $30k and wife gets 50k. Wife would want Nelson 'cos she gets 60k while husband gets only 20k. Who had time for that with the Q5 and Q6 staring one in the face?
Communicate now with those who not only know what a legal education is, but can offer you worthy advice and commentary as you complete the three most educational, yet challenging years of your law related post graduate life.
Register now, it's still FREE!
Already a member? Login
- robinhoodOO
- Posts: 876
- Joined: Wed Mar 16, 2011 1:08 pm
Re: July 2015 California Bar Exam
Geez! Could you remember to delete quotes as they become unrelatedBuenAbogado wrote:By memorizing what we wrote on them

-
- Posts: 211
- Joined: Thu Oct 21, 2010 12:01 am
Re: July 2015 California Bar Exam
petsoundspop wrote:I think just the sheer number of issues to address. There was so much going on in the fact pattern that I had trouble keeping it all together and keeping my time reasonable. By the time I got to the PR part of the question I was really low on time. I felt that there was way too much going on in that essay to really address in an hour.BuenAbogado wrote:What about the corp essay did you find hard?petsoundspop wrote:I seriously believe that both PT-A and the corporations essay were insanely difficult. I definitely reviewed a lot of PTs before the exam and didn't really see much that matched that first PT in terms of difficulty. Maybe I'm alone in that. Also, the fact that I found myself not writing very much threw me off my game because I was used to filling up the entire three hours on the practice PTs. As for the corporations essay, that was the biggest middle finger they could have given to us. Both left me very frazzled and destroyed my confidence about passing. However, I'm hoping there is a generous curve on this one because the thought of taking this thing again doesn't even compute at this point.injun wrote:July 2013 supposedly had a generous curve because either one or both PTs were super difficult. I thought these were tough, but I'm not sure if they were as difficult as July 2013BuenAbogado wrote:
PT A - Very hard, although if you wrote it in a responsive fashion, i.e. show that you clearly are addressing only the points that they brought up, you will be WAYYYYYYYYYYYY ahead of the pack. Many people I spoke with had no clue how to structure it, and/or did a freestyle.
PT B - Not sure how I did. I think I messed up by addressing remedies under each of the two issues, rather than make one entire section for remedies. Also I should have probably had a section for Applicable Law AND Facts rather than have them as two separate headings.
If I fail this exam, it will be because of the PTs.
Me too! Q#5 was my achilles heel, it felt like a corporations final exam where the professor crammed in as many issues as possible to set the curve. I left out remedies and CA distinctions, so I throw it out as my token 55. I was heavy on the director duties since it seemed fact friendly but it slowed me down. I am sweating about the CP because like a couple others, I got too family law specialist exam crazy on codes, especially the 3-year SOL on child support reimbursements under FC §920(c)(1) and I am scared shitless to have a BK lawyer grading that one especially after he had a reaming from a trustee earlier that day.
- robinhoodOO
- Posts: 876
- Joined: Wed Mar 16, 2011 1:08 pm
Re: July 2015 California Bar Exam
How do you know who's grading that Q? And, what did he/she do to piss off a bk trustee (they usually piss me off)?gaagoots wrote: and I am scared shitless to have a BK lawyer grading that one especially after he had a reaming from a trustee earlier that day.
-
- Posts: 211
- Joined: Thu Oct 21, 2010 12:01 am
Re: July 2015 California Bar Exam
I don't know about your district but the Central District, they are pure evil. I don't know if a BK or UD or Fam Law lawyer or DUI or lemon law lawyer is grading it. I saw some youtube on PTs with this older woman named Vivian something thinking oh shit--she was a grader once.robinhoodOO wrote:How do you know who's grading that Q? And, what did he/she do to piss off a bk trustee (they usually piss me off)?gaagoots wrote: and I am scared shitless to have a BK lawyer grading that one especially after he had a reaming from a trustee earlier that day.
Seriously? What are you waiting for?
Now there's a charge.
Just kidding ... it's still FREE!
Already a member? Login