BarBri Bar Review Hangout - July 2015 Exam Forum

[musicfor18]

What is the point of the super priority for purchase-money creditors? I get that they get first priority, but it is my understanding that they also have to comply with the recording statutes. Does that just mean that they have to record eventually, but the sequence of recording will not affect their priority?

I just looked this over in Franzese's lecture handout. First of all, a priority conflict between a PMSI-holder and an earlier-in-time creditor really can only happen when a prior creditor has perfected rights in the debtors' after-acquired collateral, right? Otherwise, as a logical matter, there can't be any prior security interests in the collateral because debtor didn't have the collateral until he got it pursuant to the PMSI.

PMSIs in non-consumer goods will get super priority over AACFs if they follow the right rules. If the PMSI is in equipment, the SP just has to file within 20 days of the debtor taking possession of the equipment, and then he gets super priority. If the PMSI is in inventory, then they have to file and notify the prior AACF before the debtor takes the possession of the inventory. As long as they do this, they get superpriority.

And I guess, because PMSIs in consumer goods perfect automatically upon attachment, a holder of a PMSI in consumer goods never has to file anything in order to get super priority? I guess that's the whole point of giving that special status to the consumer goods PMSI-holder.

[kyle010723]

Accidentally clicked into the Themis thread and that place looked like a foreign land...

[florentine]

Barbri Set 6's certainly don't make me feel anymore confident about myself. I thought these were supposed to be the easy ones before the test...

[kyle010723]

Barbri Set 6's certainly don't make me feel anymore confident about myself. I thought these were supposed to be the easy ones before the test...

No, MPQ 5 and 6 are the hardest

[BearState]

On the MBE Refresher review videos, Sambito constantly mentions a "grid" technique in the "intro to the refresher"--I see no intro video. Does anyone know what this grid thing is?

[Good Guy Gaud]

On the MBE Refresher review videos, Sambito constantly mentions a "grid" technique in the "intro to the refresher"--I see no intro video. Does anyone know what this grid thing is?

I think she's referring to her little mini outline she talks about in the beginning of each video. Not 100%, I didn't find Sambito to be very helpful. Reading the explanations honestly made a lot more sense.

[rinkrat19]

Does difficulty really matter though? For example, in PA just about every year (July) approx. 82.5-83% pass on the first try. If its harder for one, its harder for all. But regardless of difficulty, that percentage of first time passers remains relatively constant. I don't really see how difficulty really affects the probable outcome unless you are really skirting that 18th percentile line.

In Oregon, the July 2014 was a pretty significant drop down to 65% passing. Only 1 other time since 2000 has the July test even been under 70%, and usually it's more like 75%. I can't decide whether to interpret last July's terrible passage rate as the new norm, or as an outlier unlikely to be repeated so soon.

[Good Guy Gaud]

I can't decide whether to interpret last July's terrible passage rate as the new norm, or as an outlier unlikely to be repeated so soon.

This is what haunts my dreams.

[kyle010723]

I can't decide whether to interpret last July's terrible passage rate as the new norm, or as an outlier unlikely to be repeated so soon.

This is what haunts my dreams.

Or pray that they over correct? I guess that wouldn't help if everyone else did super well either.

This Feb apparently dropped across the board too. http://excessofdemocracy.com/blog/2015/ ... -last-year

[charlesxavier]

Can anyone clarify the 90 day rule for Accord and Satisfaction--in the Commercial Paper Context. If there's a genuine dispute, I tender a check that conspicuously say "Paid In Full" and the other party deposits it then they have 90 days to return it and essentially rescind the accord & satisfaction? Is that only if you weren't aware that it said paid in full when you cashed it?

The materials don't go that deep but one essay answer said if you cash the check knowing about the "paid in full" you can't rescind at all. The other said regardless of knowledge, cashing the check ends the dispute.

[3|ink]

What is the point of the super priority for purchase-money creditors? I get that they get first priority, but it is my understanding that they also have to comply with the recording statutes. Does that just mean that they have to record eventually, but the sequence of recording will not affect their priority?

I will answer this under the assumption that you are asking with regard to land sale stuff and mortgages (no idea about the secured transaction stuff above).

The MBE analysis lecture after practice exam did a good job describing this (question 26).

PMM are generally superior when judged against PRIOR mortgages on the property. So if you have prior mortgagees of the mortgatgor, a PMM who comes in AFTER those people, they get this super priority.

However, a PMM still has to play by the recording statute rules with regard to subsequent mortgages. Thus, if a PMM doesnt record, and the mortgagor takes out another mortgage on the property and that Bank 2 mortgagee records, Bank 2 beats the PMM. Thus, a PMM is capable of being defeated by SUBSEQUENT mortgages or liens by operation of the recording acts.

I watched that video too and I don't recall this explanation.

But how can there be a prior mortgage to a PMM? I thought a PMM by definition allows the borrower to buy the property. So how can there be a prior mortgage unless it was a mortgage of a prior owner that was never discharged or satisfied?

[victortsoi]

just did the 21 q ncbex set, did worse than on the barbri mixed sets. what gives? is that representative?

[3|ink]

What is the point of the super priority for purchase-money creditors? I get that they get first priority, but it is my understanding that they also have to comply with the recording statutes. Does that just mean that they have to record eventually, but the sequence of recording will not affect their priority?

I just looked this over in Franzese's lecture handout. First of all, a priority conflict between a PMSI-holder and an earlier-in-time creditor really can only happen when a prior creditor has perfected rights in the debtors' after-acquired collateral, right? Otherwise, as a logical matter, there can't be any prior security interests in the collateral because debtor didn't have the collateral until he got it pursuant to the PMSI.

PMSIs in non-consumer goods will get super priority over AACFs if they follow the right rules. If the PMSI is in equipment, the SP just has to file within 20 days of the debtor taking possession of the equipment, and then he gets super priority. If the PMSI is in inventory, then they have to file and notify the prior AACF before the debtor takes the possession of the inventory. As long as they do this, they get superpriority.

And I guess, because PMSIs in consumer goods perfect automatically upon attachment, a holder of a PMSI in consumer goods never has to file anything in order to get super priority? I guess that's the whole point of giving that special status to the consumer goods PMSI-holder.

Ah. That explains it. Thanks!

[kyle010723]

just did the 21 q ncbex set, did worse than on the barbri mixed sets. what gives? is that representative?

21 give you smaller margin for error and smaller sample size. Unless you're talking about a HUGE difference, I wouldn't be too too concerned.

[victortsoi]

just did the 21 q ncbex set, did worse than on the barbri mixed sets. what gives? is that representative?

21 give you smaller margin for error and smaller sample size. Unless you're talking about a HUGE difference, I wouldn't be too too concerned.

about 10%, but yeah, i see what you're saying.

[Danger Zone]

Can someone that's taking NY explain to me what a pour-over gift is? Preferably as if I were a five year old, because no matter how many times I read the trusts handout, I can't comprehend the words.

You guys, I think I'm burning out.

[kyle010723]

about 10%, but yeah, i see what you're saying.

A 10% drop is a mere 2 questions, it could be just two bad 50/50, I wouldn't sweat it.

[Good Guy Gaud]

Can someone that's taking NY explain to me what a pour-over gift is? Preferably as if I were a five year old, because no matter how many times I read the trusts handout, I can't comprehend the words.

You guys, I think I'm burning out.

Is it different in NY than elsewhere?

Also, take a day off, bro. You're a bright guy so it's not going to make or break your score and it may provide you with some time to refocus. If a day is too much, grind out during a morning and relax during the afternoon/evening.

[Danger Zone]

Can someone that's taking NY explain to me what a pour-over gift is? Preferably as if I were a five year old, because no matter how many times I read the trusts handout, I can't comprehend the words.

You guys, I think I'm burning out.

Is it different in NY than elsewhere?

Also, take a day off, bro. You're a bright guy so it's not going to make or break your score and it may provide you with some time to refocus. If a day is too much, grind out during a morning and relax during the afternoon/evening.

Ha appreciate that man, it's nice to have you back. Yeah I took all of last weekend off so I feel bad about taking any additional time off. Plus my SO gets back from a month long trip on July 25th so I know I only have 9 more days to study.

[cdelgado]

Can anyone clarify the 90 day rule for Accord and Satisfaction--in the Commercial Paper Context. If there's a genuine dispute, I tender a check that conspicuously say "Paid In Full" and the other party deposits it then they have 90 days to return it and essentially rescind the accord & satisfaction? Is that only if you weren't aware that it said paid in full when you cashed it?

The materials don't go that deep but one essay answer said if you cash the check knowing about the "paid in full" you can't rescind at all. The other said regardless of knowledge, cashing the check ends the dispute.

Basically so.

The payment in full must be marked on the instrument, not an accompanying document.

If the creditor inadvertently/unknowingly obtains payment (cashes the check) on a full payment accord and satisfaction, it has 90 days to return payment to the maker and preserve its rights. However, if the creditor knew that it was tendered in full satisfaction, it loses this defense.

[Ludacrispat26]

This may be asking a bit much, but what raw % should we really feel safe at on the MBE? I feel like ~65% is the cutoff?

[BarbriSlave]

Can someone that's taking NY explain to me what a pour-over gift is? Preferably as if I were a five year old, because no matter how many times I read the trusts handout, I can't comprehend the words.

You guys, I think I'm burning out.

A pour-over gift is when a gift from a Will is transferred to an account that is already in existence outside of the will. For purposes of the Bar Exam I believe this will only come up in the context of a Trust in a Will. A pour-over trust is a trust that is created by the testator either before the will is executed (with no corpus) or one that is created contemporaneously with the Will. So when the testator dies the money from the estate will "pour-over" into that trust that was created.

[kyle010723]

This may be asking a bit much, but what raw % should we really feel safe at on the MBE? I feel like ~65% is the cutoff?

I'd say 70%+ you should feel real safe. For me, "real" safe imply room for dumb errors and bad 50/50

[kykiske]

Can someone that's taking NY explain to me what a pour-over gift is? Preferably as if I were a five year old, because no matter how many times I read the trusts handout, I can't comprehend the words.

You guys, I think I'm burning out.

Here's my analysis:

Treat a pour-over gift as another term in the testator's will. That term operates on a trust, usually created by the testator.

Let's say Randy decides to set up a trust for his son, Stan, along with Stan's three friends, Kyle, Kenny, and Cartman. Randy expects the current trust corpus to have sufficient income to provide for the care and support of Stan and his friends. Yet Randy, being very cautious, wants to further ensure that the trust corpus will always exist to support Stan and his friends. To that end, Randy visits his lawyer, Gerald. Randy expresses his intent to Gerald. Gerald then advises Randy to include a pour-over gift term in Randy's will. Randy then may tailor that pour-over gift however he wishes. But put simply, according to Gerald, Randy may devise property that flows into the trust upon Randy's death.

[Danger Zone]

Thanks guys. Had to read those a couple of times but I get it now. Appreciated the South Park hypo.