Themis Bar Review Hangout - July 2014 Exam Forum

[Tanicius]

70% is taking into account the 5+% bump you get from the 10-15 added points from scaling the score.

Can someone explain this to me like I'm 8 years old?

Your raw score is out of 190 points, even though you answer 200 questions. This is because ten questions are experimental and count for no points.

To account for those experimental questions, your raw score will automatically receive a 10-point boost on the real test. Note, however, that any questions you got correct on the experimental questions will also be subtracted from your overall score.

The NCBE will also award extra points for any questions they knock out of contention after scrutinizing statistical difficulty. What they're looking for are mistaken/inaccurate/unfair wording they failed to catch in their questions. The amount of knocked-out questions will typically be between 0 and 5.

Add the knocked-out points to your score, plus the 10 experimental question points, and you're realistically looking at boost of between 10-15 for your final score, depending on the test. That is called your "scaled" score.

[jumpingjack]

70% is taking into account the 5+% bump you get from the 10-15 added points from scaling the score.

Can someone explain this to me like I'm 8 years old?

Your raw score is out of 190 points, even though you answer 200 questions. This is because ten questions are experimental and count for no points.

To account for those experimental questions, your raw score will automatically receive a 10-point boost on the real test. Note, however, that any questions you got correct on the experimental questions will also be subtracted from your overall score.

The NCBE will also award extra points for any questions they knock out of contention after scrutinizing statistical difficulty. What they're looking for are mistaken/inaccurate/unfair wording they failed to catch in their questions. The amount of knocked-out questions will typically be between 0 and 5.

Add the knocked-out points to your score, plus the 10 experimental question points, and you're realistically looking at boost of between 10-15 for your final score, depending on the test. That is called your "scaled" score.

Thank you so much, that was perfect.

[bport hopeful]

I know this was talked about, but I cant find a specific answer to my question.

How long should I expect to sink into watching the explanation videos from the simulated MBE

[lawyerwannabe]

Regarding mixed MBEs: what percentage should we be at to feel comfortable (especially if we lack confidence regarding the essays)? I wish Themis would publish correlations between how well students did on their MBE questions in relation to their performance on the real deal.

I think the idea is that relying on the MBE is unwise for NY since it only makes up 40% of our grade and the essays make up 40%. The rule of thumb I've heard is that you'll want around 70% right on the MBE to pass assuming you do average on the essays.

70% on the real thing seems hard as hell.

Are you sure that's right? In IL, for example, if you 75% of the questions right, you automatically pass.

70% is taking into account the 5+% bump you get from the 10-15 added points from scaling the score.

I hope that the percentages from the practice MBEs translate well into percentages on the real deal. That is my main concern.

[lawyerwannabe]

I know this was talked about, but I cant find a specific answer to my question.

How long should I expect to sink into watching the explanation videos from the simulated MBE

I frankly think they should be skipped. Your time will likely be better spent elsewhere (like actually reviewing your MBE outlines).

[Tanicius]

I hope that the percentages from the practice MBEs translate well into percentages on the real deal. That is my main concern.

Here's the thing. I know not everyone agrees that the actual MBE is easier than Themis's questions. But we've heard many people say that the real questions are easier, and we've heard no one say that they did substantially worse on the real MBE than they did on practice question sets. The only situation where this is liable to occur is if you have a crisis during the test. How to avoid this? Wake up early consistently in the weeks before the real thing -- you should be going to bed early and waking up early now instead of procrastinating that important biological clock factor to the last minute. And if you don't regularly drink energy/caffeine drinks or take medication in your practice session, the real thing is not the time to be experimenting. If you have a medical condition that could screw things up, plan out what you will do during the real thing to handle it efficiently.

[lawyerwannabe]

I hope that the percentages from the practice MBEs translate well into percentages on the real deal. That is my main concern.

Here's the thing. I know not everyone agrees that the actual MBE is easier than Themis's questions. But we've heard many people say that the real questions are easier, and we've heard no one say that they did substantially worse on the real MBE than they did on practice question sets. The only situation where this is liable to occur is if you have a crisis during the test. How to avoid this? Wake up early consistently in the weeks before the real thing -- you should be going to bed early and waking up early now instead of procrastinating that important biological clock factor to the last minute. And if you don't regularly drink energy/caffeine drinks or take medication in your practice session, the real thing is not the time to be experimenting. If you have a medical condition that could screw things up, plan out what you will do during the real thing to handle it efficiently.

Good call on the clock thing. I am a night owl.

[Tanicius]

Good call on the clock thing. I am a night owl.

As am I. I've been forcing myself to wake up at 8 every morning, even on weekends, cause when I let that shit go, it goes, never to return.

[AIpwns]

How are Florida people doing on the Florida MC? I am having a hard time hitting 70%.

Also, can someone explain this to me?

Hook, Line, and Sinker form a partnership to manufacture and sell custom fishing nets. The partners agree that Hook will be the general partner and will contribute $10,000, while Line and Sinker will be limited partners and will contribute $5,000 each. While conducting partnership business, Hook defrauds several customers and vendors who sue and win judgments totaling $50,000. The partnership is insolvent. Which of the following is true?

A. Hook, Line, and Sinker are all personally liable to the creditors.
B. Neither Hook, Line, nor Sinker are personally liable to the creditors.
C. Hook is personally liable to the creditors, but Line and Sinker are not.
D. Hook, Line, and Sinker are jointly and severally liable to the creditors.

I thought, "Well that is fantastic that they agreed to be a limited partnership, but they didn't file anything. Therefore, they are all liable." Is this happening to everyone?

Also, I keep getting the same Corporations and Secured Transactions multiple choice questions over and over. Is there something I am missing?

[jigglypuffdreams]

I hope that the percentages from the practice MBEs translate well into percentages on the real deal. That is my main concern.

Here's the thing. I know not everyone agrees that the actual MBE is easier than Themis's questions. But we've heard many people say that the real questions are easier, and we've heard no one say that they did substantially worse on the real MBE than they did on practice question sets. The only situation where this is liable to occur is if you have a crisis during the test. How to avoid this? Wake up early consistently in the weeks before the real thing -- you should be going to bed early and waking up early now instead of procrastinating that important biological clock factor to the last minute. And if you don't regularly drink energy/caffeine drinks or take medication in your practice session, the real thing is not the time to be experimenting. If you have a medical condition that could screw things up, plan out what you will do during the real thing to handle it efficiently.

Good advice. Not gonna lie, I definitely did a caffeine test run for the simulated MBE to figure out what was a good amount for me and I definitely found it helpful. Obviously I'll be more nervous on the real thing so I think that'll play into it too, but figuring out what makes the six hours of endurance better is really helpful.

[Tanicius]

I hope that the percentages from the practice MBEs translate well into percentages on the real deal. That is my main concern.

Here's the thing. I know not everyone agrees that the actual MBE is easier than Themis's questions. But we've heard many people say that the real questions are easier, and we've heard no one say that they did substantially worse on the real MBE than they did on practice question sets. The only situation where this is liable to occur is if you have a crisis during the test. How to avoid this? Wake up early consistently in the weeks before the real thing -- you should be going to bed early and waking up early now instead of procrastinating that important biological clock factor to the last minute. And if you don't regularly drink energy/caffeine drinks or take medication in your practice session, the real thing is not the time to be experimenting. If you have a medical condition that could screw things up, plan out what you will do during the real thing to handle it efficiently.

Good advice. Not gonna lie, I definitely did a caffeine test run for the simulated MBE to figure out what was a good amount for me and I definitely found it helpful. Obviously I'll be more nervous on the real thing so I think that'll play into it too, but figuring out what makes the six hours of endurance better is really helpful.

Just make sure you don't unexpectedly get the coffee runs on test day. That would suck.

[bport hopeful]

Ive been trying not to do this too much, because I could do it all day, but I need some help with this one. I picked C.

The defendant, the owner of a truck leasing company, asked the plaintiff, one of the defendant's employees, to deliver $1,000 to the dealership's main office. The following week, as a result of a dispute over whether the money had been delivered, the defendant instructed the plaintiff to come to the office to submit to a lie detector test.
When the plaintiff reported to the defendant's office for the test, it was not administered. Instead, without hearing the plaintiff's story, the defendant shouted at him, "You're a thief!" and fired him. The defendant's shout was overheard by several other employees who were in another office, which was separated from the defendant's office by a thin partition. The next day, the plaintiff accepted another job at a higher salary. Several weeks later, upon discovering that the money had not been stolen, the defendant offered to rehire the plaintiff.
In a suit for slander by the plaintiff against the defendant, the plaintiff will
A. Prevail, because the plaintiff was fraudulently induced to go to the office for a lie detector test, which was not, in fact, given.
B. Prevail, if the defendant should have foreseen that the statement would be overheard by other employees.
C. Not prevail, if the defendant made the charge in good faith, believing it to be true.
D. Not prevail, because the statement was made to the plaintiff alone and intended for his ears only.
Incorrect: Answer choice B is correct. Defamation is the publication of information disseminated by the defendant to a third party that is about the plaintiff and injures the plaintiff's reputation. Although the statements were made directly to the plaintiff, if it was foreseeable that others would hear the statement, it will be considered published and the defendant will be liable. Answer choice A is incorrect because whether the defendant fraudulently induced the plaintiff to go to the office is irrelevant to a claim of defamation. Answer choice C is incorrect because it addresses the standard for someone asserting a privilege. However, here, the defendant is operating outside the privilege because he was speaking to the plaintiff (as opposed to a prospective employer) and it was not a part of an employee review. Answer choice D is incorrect because even if the defendant's remarks were not intended for others to hear, if a remark is heard by others, either intentionally or negligently, it was published and the defendant is liable.

[Tanicius]

Ive been trying not to do this too much, because I could do it all day, but I need some help with this one. I picked C.

The defendant, the owner of a truck leasing company, asked the plaintiff, one of the defendant's employees, to deliver $1,000 to the dealership's main office. The following week, as a result of a dispute over whether the money had been delivered, the defendant instructed the plaintiff to come to the office to submit to a lie detector test.
When the plaintiff reported to the defendant's office for the test, it was not administered. Instead, without hearing the plaintiff's story, the defendant shouted at him, "You're a thief!" and fired him. The defendant's shout was overheard by several other employees who were in another office, which was separated from the defendant's office by a thin partition. The next day, the plaintiff accepted another job at a higher salary. Several weeks later, upon discovering that the money had not been stolen, the defendant offered to rehire the plaintiff.
In a suit for slander by the plaintiff against the defendant, the plaintiff will
A. Prevail, because the plaintiff was fraudulently induced to go to the office for a lie detector test, which was not, in fact, given.
B. Prevail, if the defendant should have foreseen that the statement would be overheard by other employees.
C. Not prevail, if the defendant made the charge in good faith, believing it to be true.
D. Not prevail, because the statement was made to the plaintiff alone and intended for his ears only.
Incorrect: Answer choice B is correct. Defamation is the publication of information disseminated by the defendant to a third party that is about the plaintiff and injures the plaintiff's reputation. Although the statements were made directly to the plaintiff, if it was foreseeable that others would hear the statement, it will be considered published and the defendant will be liable. Answer choice A is incorrect because whether the defendant fraudulently induced the plaintiff to go to the office is irrelevant to a claim of defamation. Answer choice C is incorrect because it addresses the standard for someone asserting a privilege. However, here, the defendant is operating outside the privilege because he was speaking to the plaintiff (as opposed to a prospective employer) and it was not a part of an employee review. Answer choice D is incorrect because even if the defendant's remarks were not intended for others to hear, if a remark is heard by others, either intentionally or negligently, it was published and the defendant is liable.

I picked B, but I could see why you wouldn't want to pick B. I hesitated with it because it applies the negligence to the likelihood of the statement's being published to third parties rather than, more importantly, to its likelihood that it was false. Looking at the other answers though, I backed into it.

C is wrong not only because of that weird privilege mumbo jumbo mentioned in the answer explanation, but also because it misstates the standard of care. Good faith is subjective awareness of a statement's falsity. In dealing with private citizens, it's an objective negligence standard, not recklessness/bad faith. You can have perfectly honest good faith that a statement is true, and still be negligent towards its odds of being false.

[bport hopeful]

That wasn't even a difficult question. Im trying to test fatigue by doing a 50 problem set at night. Haha, this might be a waste of time.

[094320]

..

[Tanicius]

That wasn't even a difficult question. Im trying to test fatigue by doing a 50 problem set at night. Haha, this might be a waste of time.

I don't think that's worth while. Focus on substance. Fatigue is really only testable on the 100+ question sets. And while, yeah, we know we'll be hit fatigue on the real thing, we'll also be hit with more adrenaline than we've had since our first final as 1Ls.

[bport hopeful]

That wasn't even a difficult question. Im trying to test fatigue by doing a 50 problem set at night. Haha, this might be a waste of time.

I don't think that's worth while. Focus on substance. Fatigue is really only testable on the 100+ question sets. And while, yeah, we know we'll be hit fatigue on the real thing, we'll also be hit with more adrenaline than we've had since our first final as 1Ls.

I dont think its worth while either. I really just can't enjoy my time right now with the test on my mind, so I figured I might as well do something.

[iLoveFruits&Veggies]

learning all the CA distinctions in evidence is making me forget the federal evidence rules... there's so many! Why can't everyone just agree on evidence for pete's sakes??! I worked SO hard to get good MBE scores in evidence and now I think they're going to plummet because I won't know what's fed and what's CA. Ugh. and that's my rant for the evening

[071816]

That wasn't even a difficult question. Im trying to test fatigue by doing a 50 problem set at night. Haha, this might be a waste of time.

I don't think that's worth while. Focus on substance. Fatigue is really only testable on the 100+ question sets. And while, yeah, we know we'll be hit fatigue on the real thing, we'll also be hit with more adrenaline than we've had since our first final as 1Ls.

I dont think its worth while either. I really just can't enjoy my time right now with the test on my mind, so I figured I might as well do something.

step away and do it tomorrow man! i've tried to do this also and it just ends up being a waste of time.

[071816]

learning all the CA distinctions in evidence is making me forget the federal evidence rules... there's so many! Why can't everyone just agree on evidence for pete's sakes??! I worked SO hard to get good MBE scores in evidence and now I think they're going to plummet because I won't know what's fed and what's CA. Ugh. and that's my rant for the evening

honestly, i'm considering not even bothering to review the CA distinctions any further. If it comes up on the essay I'll just write some BS about prop 8 if it's a criminal case and then just use the federal rules (and whatever I remember from the CA rules). Fuck all those distinctions!

[iLoveFruits&Veggies]

learning all the CA distinctions in evidence is making me forget the federal evidence rules... there's so many! Why can't everyone just agree on evidence for pete's sakes??! I worked SO hard to get good MBE scores in evidence and now I think they're going to plummet because I won't know what's fed and what's CA. Ugh. and that's my rant for the evening

honestly, i'm considering not even bothering to review the CA distinctions any further. If it comes up on the essay I'll just write some BS about prop 8 if it's a criminal case and then just use the federal rules (and whatever I remember from the CA rules). Fuck all those distinctions!

I'm starting to think the same way. We can still get points if we mess up the rules on the essays, but by studying all these distinctions, I'm getting the federal rules messed up now, and that's going to make me lose points on the MBE - and I need each and every point I can get. So frustrating

[Genuine4ps]

I'm a little bit confused about something.

If A and B agree to commit a crime (i.e., there's a conspiracy), but B is the only one who commits the actual crime. B can obviously be charged with conspiracy and the underlying crime. Can A also be charged with the underlying crime or just conspiracy? I just had an MBE question that seemed to suggest A could be charged with the underlying crime.

[Bigbub75]

I hope that the percentages from the practice MBEs translate well into percentages on the real deal. That is my main concern.

Here's the thing. I know not everyone agrees that the actual MBE is easier than Themis's questions. But we've heard many people say that the real questions are easier, and we've heard no one say that they did substantially worse on the real MBE than they did on practice question sets. The only situation where this is liable to occur is if you have a crisis during the test. How to avoid this? Wake up early consistently in the weeks before the real thing -- you should be going to bed early and waking up early now instead of procrastinating that important biological clock factor to the last minute. And if you don't regularly drink energy/caffeine drinks or take medication in your practice session, the real thing is not the time to be experimenting. If you have a medical condition that could screw things up, plan out what you will do during the real thing to handle it efficiently.

Good advice. Not gonna lie, I definitely did a caffeine test run for the simulated MBE to figure out what was a good amount for me and I definitely found it helpful. Obviously I'll be more nervous on the real thing so I think that'll play into it too, but figuring out what makes the six hours of endurance better is really helpful.

Just make sure you don't unexpectedly get the coffee runs on test day. That would suck.

This is my nightmare. I am addicted to coffee, but maybe once a month it will not agree with my stomach. I am praying it does not happen on test day. I am tempted to skip the caffeine out of fear, but I think caffeine withdrawal would be almost as bad as the coffee runs! For lunch I know I am gonna keep it simple and stick to a sandwich. Nothing exotic or new.

[lawyerwannabe]

I'm a little bit confused about something.

If A and B agree to commit a crime (i.e., there's a conspiracy), but B is the only one who commits the actual crime. B can obviously be charged with conspiracy and the underlying crime. Can A also be charged with the underlying crime or just conspiracy? I just had an MBE question that seemed to suggest A could be charged with the underlying crime.

The question should not be suggesting anything. It should be telling you A will be charged with the underlying crime.

Edit: assuming it was not some random crime not committed in furtherance or as a natural and probable consequence of the planned crime. I think the example given is a co-conspirator commits rape during a planned robbery or something.

[mmmnnn]

I'm a little bit confused about something.

If A and B agree to commit a crime (i.e., there's a conspiracy), but B is the only one who commits the actual crime. B can obviously be charged with conspiracy and the underlying crime. Can A also be charged with the underlying crime or just conspiracy? I just had an MBE question that seemed to suggest A could be charged with the underlying crime.

He can be. It's akin to accomplice liability.