February 2016 MBE Reactions (Don't discuss specific questions) Forum

[Sua Spontaneous]

I felt good about the MBEs, but I mismanaged my time on 3-4 essays. I feel like 70% sure I did not pass, objectively speaking. Going to take the next week or so off and then dive back into essay practice.

[Raiden]

So, we all thought July MBE was tough, but now we all think February MBE is easier. Will that work in our favor? Or will the curve just be less forgiving this time around if the MBE questions were easier. I'd like to believe it was easier because us repeaters studied differently (such as using adaptibar the second time around), but knowing the statistics for repeaters, it doesn't seem right.

[BrokenMouse]

.

[Texasguy]

FIRST THINGS FIRST PLEASE BE CAREFUL TO KEEP YOUR POSTS BROAD AND ABSTRACT SO AS NOT TO DISCUSS THE SPECIFICS OF THE MBE.

I'm hoping this board can serve as a friendly forum for those who took the February 2016 MBE to discuss their reactions to the test.

Please feel free to ask questions about the law, but remember to keep your questions and answers broad so as not to break the rules.

Good luck to everyone!

Was it just me or did the morning session seem way more difficult than the pm session?

[Zebra]

How can we figure out the grading system they use? Like if your MBE is within a certain range there's potential for auto pass? Or any info re grading/scores....

[BrokenMouse]

.

[iwantmybar]

Aren't MBE questions randomized? Your PM might be my AM. But considering I and a few others had the AAAAAAAAAA streak during morning session, it seems like questions themselves are not randomized, but AM and PM might be shuffled for each person sitting next to each other.

Could be but considering how strict they are about the anti cheating policy, I imagine that one could tell someone else what questions he had during the AM session and so on.

[caveman2]

Aren't MBE questions randomized? Your PM might be my AM. But considering I and a few others had the AAAAAAAAAA streak during morning session, it seems like questions themselves are not randomized, but AM and PM might be shuffled for each person sitting next to each other.

Could be but considering how strict they are about the anti cheating policy, I imagine that one could tell someone else what questions he had during the AM session and so on.

I definitely think the AM and PM are shuffled. There were several people on the previous MBE thread who said AM was way harder and several who said the opposite. But if that's true, I wonder how they keep it straight making sure you get the one you didn't already have. Seems like the proctors could easily mess that up.

[iwantmybar]

Well. The question about firework was the PM for me. Same for the infection of emotional distress at the funerals. I think it is not against the rules to say that.

But anyway, this MBE was much more easier than last july, except for civ pro.

[LittleE]

Haven't been here in a while...I'm assuming the other thread got shut down or banned. Not surprised.

I thought the Feb. MBE wasn't as difficult as July but nonetheless still difficult. Fact patterns were so long and even the shorter ones were not easy.

The general assessment on the now-closed topic was that this was significantly easier and/or more straightforward than July 2015. (Though there was still heated debate on a few specific questions obviously.)
I agree 100% with that.

I think I studied "smarter" (though less) for this past MBE than in July.
For BARBRI at least, the civil procedure prep is way off from what the questions are like though that might be improved for this next batch of books. Didn't feel like BARBRI fact patterns read like the actual questions but they were closer than in July where I felt like I was taking a test of random exceptions to exceptions to exceptions written in gobbledygook.

[ElBence]

Well. The question about firework was the PM for me. Same for the infection of emotional distress at the funerals. I think it is not against the rules to say that.

But anyway, this MBE was much more easier than last july, except for civ pro.

During the summer between 1L and 2L, my family and I lit fireworks with some neighbors who have kids about the same age as my kids. One of the neighbors is an in-house lawyer for a well known large company, and had graduated five years previously. He didn't bring any fireworks, and some of the neighbors asked, "Do you know something about the legal nature of fireworks that we don't?" He and I talked about fireworks and negligence at length, and came to the conclusion that the inherently dangerous nature of fireworks makes them an issue of strict liability. Shortly after we came to this conclusion, one of the aerials went sideways and hit a nearby vehicle. The fact that we had taken all reasonable measures to ensure we as a group had not breached any duty of reasonable care, and despite this there was almost a harm to property led the two of us to conclude we had correctly categorized fireworks as an issue of strict liability.

[FinallyPassedTheBar]

On my block, everyone goes crazy with fireworks on 4th of July. I'm talking mortar launched fireworks like you see at the big shows. And my neighbors are launching them in the middle of the small intersection on my block. I always make sure my house insurance is up-to-date.

[udonisandtrinity]

Repeat taker. Last July, I did not finish on time and guessed 15 questions in total. For Feb. 2016, I finished on time. I did 750 Questions from Kaplan, including two simulated exams (Midterm: 97 Raw, Final: 116 Raw). I also completed about 650 Questions from Adaptibar (huge help). The increase from my midterm to my final exam score was largely due to Adapitbar.

I need about a 50-52 written average score and a 125-130 raw in order to pass NY.

Before this thread was revamped, there were about 40 questions discussed. I know for certainty that I missed at least 12 questions. 25 of them I answered correctly and 3 are up for debate. Not all these questions were super difficult. Some were just very easy, which threw me off. But if most of the 40 questions discussed were representative of the difficult ones, then I would expect a 1-3% increase in raw score, which I hope would place me somewhere between 125-130.

[starryski]

Repeat taker. Last July, I did not finish on time and guessed 15 questions in total. For Feb. 2016, I finished on time. I did 750 Questions from Kaplan, including two simulated exams (Midterm: 97 Raw, Final: 116 Raw). I also completed about 650 Questions from Adaptibar (huge help). The increase from my midterm to my final exam score was largely due to Adapitbar.

I need about a 50-52 written average score and a 125-130 raw in order to pass NY.

Before this thread was revamped, there were about 40 questions discussed. I know for certainty that I missed at least 12 questions. 25 of them I answered correctly and 3 are up for debate. Not all these questions were super difficult. Some were just very easy, which threw me off. But if most of the 40 questions discussed were representative of the difficult ones, then I would expect a 1-3% increase in raw score, which I hope would place me somewhere between 125-130.

yeah for a few that were easy i would second guess and reread the question and answers and complicate things. i kept telling myself "move on, keep going!" so i did.

[Zebra]

Well. The question about firework was the PM for me. Same for the infection of emotional distress at the funerals. I think it is not against the rules to say that.

But anyway, this MBE was much more easier than last july, except for civ pro.

During the summer between 1L and 2L, my family and I lit fireworks with some neighbors who have kids about the same age as my kids. One of the neighbors is an in-house lawyer for a well known large company, and had graduated five years previously. He didn't bring any fireworks, and some of the neighbors asked, "Do you know something about the legal nature of fireworks that we don't?" He and I talked about fireworks and negligence at length, and came to the conclusion that the inherently dangerous nature of fireworks makes them an issue of strict liability. Shortly after we came to this conclusion, one of the aerials went sideways and hit a nearby vehicle. The fact that we had taken all reasonable measures to ensure we as a group had not breached any duty of reasonable care, and despite this there was almost a harm to property led the two of us to conclude we had correctly categorized fireworks as an issue of strict liability.

Lol. I smirked while reading this. So did the lawyer mention that A) Inherently/Ultrahazardous Dangerous Activity, and as a result Strict Liability!? Rather than battery?! I thought so too since my neighbors brothers dog is a lawyer and said the same thing.

[Sam0406]

I am a retaker, failed the last July by only a few points. Last July, did fine on the MBEs, even though I thought it was difficult. I ended up losing points on the MEEs. I'm surprised to read so many of you think it was easier this time. For me, personally I feel it was just as difficult Hope the curve works out though in my favor...

[BrokenMouse]

.

[ElBence]

Well. The question about firework was the PM for me. Same for the infection of emotional distress at the funerals. I think it is not against the rules to say that.

But anyway, this MBE was much more easier than last july, except for civ pro.

During the summer between 1L and 2L, my family and I lit fireworks with some neighbors who have kids about the same age as my kids. One of the neighbors is an in-house lawyer for a well known large company, and had graduated five years previously. He didn't bring any fireworks, and some of the neighbors asked, "Do you know something about the legal nature of fireworks that we don't?" He and I talked about fireworks and negligence at length, and came to the conclusion that the inherently dangerous nature of fireworks makes them an issue of strict liability. Shortly after we came to this conclusion, one of the aerials went sideways and hit a nearby vehicle. The fact that we had taken all reasonable measures to ensure we as a group had not breached any duty of reasonable care, and despite this there was almost a harm to property led the two of us to conclude we had correctly categorized fireworks as an issue of strict liability.

Lol. I smirked while reading this. So did the lawyer mention that A) Inherently/Ultrahazardous Dangerous Activity, and as a result Strict Liability!? Rather than battery?! I thought so too since my neighbors brothers dog is a lawyer and said the same thing.

Actually the issue of battery didn't come up. I get why anybody might think that my story is a clever way of not so subtly breaking the rules, but the story is 100% true. Hand to God. Some bar exam questions are tailor made to our experiences.

[godfavorny]

Yesterday in the Washington Post - it's great that the MBE tests on legal concepts the courts themselves are split on -
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/vol ... liability/

Fireworks -> noise -> stampede in dairy barn -> 4 dead cows: Strict liability?
By Eugene Volokh March 4 at 1:58 PM

No strict liability, the Maryland Court of Appeals holds, when the noise from a lawful fireworks display causes cows to stampede in a nearby barn (Toms v. Calvary Assembly of God, decided this week).

Sounds right to me, under modern strict liability law. Strict liability is sometimes allowed for “abnormally dangerous activities,” and courts are split on whether fireworks displays are abnormally dangerous. But, even if fireworks displays are abnormally dangerous (under the messy multi-factor balancing test used for such matters), this is because of the risk of fire, not the (more modest) risk of damage through noise, which should keep strict liability from being applied here. The neighbor could still sue under negligence or nuisance, and prevail if the elements of those torts are satisfied; but he can’t prevail under an “abnormally dangerous activity” strict liability test.

[Zebra]

Yesterday in the Washington Post - it's great that the MBE tests on legal concepts the courts themselves are split on -
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/vol ... liability/

Fireworks -> noise -> stampede in dairy barn -> 4 dead cows: Strict liability?
By Eugene Volokh March 4 at 1:58 PM

No strict liability, the Maryland Court of Appeals holds, when the noise from a lawful fireworks display causes cows to stampede in a nearby barn (Toms v. Calvary Assembly of God, decided this week).

Sounds right to me, under modern strict liability law. Strict liability is sometimes allowed for “abnormally dangerous activities,” and courts are split on whether fireworks displays are abnormally dangerous. But, even if fireworks displays are abnormally dangerous (under the messy multi-factor balancing test used for such matters), this is because of the risk of fire, not the (more modest) risk of damage through noise, which should keep strict liability from being applied here. The neighbor could still sue under negligence or nuisance, and prevail if the elements of those torts are satisfied; but he can’t prevail under an “abnormally dangerous activity” strict liability test.

The issue had absolutely nothing to do with noise. The firework gadget thingy malfunctioned and injured someone rather than shooting toward the sky. This is not battery. It's SL as a result of being an abnormally dangerous activity. This obviously was based on last years 4th of July tragedy and neighbors legal input.

[Zebra]

Well. The question about firework was the PM for me. Same for the infection of emotional distress at the funerals. I think it is not against the rules to say that.

But anyway, this MBE was much more easier than last july, except for civ pro.

During the summer between 1L and 2L, my family and I lit fireworks with some neighbors who have kids about the same age as my kids. One of the neighbors is an in-house lawyer for a well known large company, and had graduated five years previously. He didn't bring any fireworks, and some of the neighbors asked, "Do you know something about the legal nature of fireworks that we don't?" He and I talked about fireworks and negligence at length, and came to the conclusion that the inherently dangerous nature of fireworks makes them an issue of strict liability. Shortly after we came to this conclusion, one of the aerials went sideways and hit a nearby vehicle. The fact that we had taken all reasonable measures to ensure we as a group had not breached any duty of reasonable care, and despite this there was almost a harm to property led the two of us to conclude we had correctly categorized fireworks as an issue of strict liability.

Lol. I smirked while reading this. So did the lawyer mention that A) Inherently/Ultrahazardous Dangerous Activity, and as a result Strict Liability!? Rather than battery?! I thought so too since my neighbors brothers dog is a lawyer and said the same thing.

Actually the issue of battery didn't come up. I get why anybody might think that my story is a clever way of not so subtly breaking the rules, but the story is 100% true. Hand to God. Some bar exam questions are tailor made to our experiences.

Sorry didn't mean to poke fun :/ but battery was listed among the options unless we're talking about a different Q...

[Sirk6222]

I'm pretty certain, based on the Adaptibar lecture and Barbri, that there mere operation of fireworks are not considered an abnormally dangerous activity, thus no strict liability action. Unless I am misunderstood about the specifics of the topic you guys are discussing. Feel free to enlighten me..

[hndls022]

.

[Sirk6222]

I'm pretty certain, based on the Adaptibar lecture and Barbri, that there mere operation of fireworks are not considered an abnormally dangerous activity, thus no strict liability action. Unless I am misunderstood about the specifics of the topic you guys are discussing. Feel free to enlighten me..

A party who conducts abnormally dangerous activity is liable for any harm that results from that. Here, Defendant was conducting abnormally dangerous activity because it is: (a) A highly risky endeavour, (b) the harm that coud occur is massive, (c) there is very little that can be done to prevent that harm, (d) conducting fireworks are not a matter of common usage, (e) the location where it was conducted was inappropriate, and (f) the safety of the community supercedes the value to be gained by conducting fireworks at this location.

The fireworks in this instance constituted abnormally dangerous activity, and will constitute abnormally dangerous activity in almost all situations. It is on the operator of the fireworks to make sure that nobody is injured doing the activity; the fireworks operator is the insurer of the viewer’s safety.

Thank you. However, I re-listened to my Adaptibar lecture the day before MBE exam, and I am almost 100% sure I remember the lecturer (don't remember his name) hone-in on the fact that the mere operation of fireworks are not considered an ADA; and that they theory to sue under would have to be negligence if something went wrong (operator breached a duty to operate the display, etc).. Was the Adaptibar lecture wrong?? (I am also aware of the previous case precedents too. There seems to be a split on the issue)

[hndls022]

.