BarBri Bar Review Hangout - July 2016 (UBE -NY) Forum

[goden]

question about MPQ 50 mixed question set, #17

[+] Spoiler

for the MPQ 50 mixed question set, anyone know why #17 is C and not A?

isn't this governed by battle of forms, where if two merchants, acceptance with additional terms governs unless the terms are material? And isn't a price term always a material term?

[sublime]

for the MPQ 50 mixed question set.....

isn't this governed by battle of forms, where if two merchants, acceptance with additional terms governs unless the terms are material? And isn't a price term always a material term?

Can you please spoiler tag at least answers that haven't even been assigned yet.

[goden]

oops sorry dude, fixed

[sublime]

oops sorry dude, fixed

All good man. No worries.

[ballouttacontrol]

I'm in a non-NY UBE state
No idea... other than we have a higher required score I guess...?

Only other idea is you didn't read the title of the thread and are lost or, alternatively, you're exceptionally cool.

I have my suspicions.

It's the only one labeled UBE which I'm pretty sure means uniform bar exam

Or u can just be a cunt

[KRose04]

Well.. I just had my ass handed to me on the con law set 3. I think I would've done better if I had just guessed x___x anyone else getting a panicked feeling that they won't pass?? That's starting to set in right now for me. Seriously considering buy those critical pass cards right now

[sublime]

Well.. I just had my ass handed to me on the con law set 3. I think I would've done better if I had just guessed x___x anyone else getting a panicked feeling that they won't pass?? That's starting to set in right now for me. Seriously considering buy those critical pass cards right now

You will be fine. I did that same set tonight and was thinking about making a similar post bc it gave me trouble too. It seemed to have a lot of questions on small shit that won't be heavily tested on the actual exam though. But some of those questions my response was "why and how in the fuck was I supposed to know that!?"

The flash cards seem helpful although overpriced. Im glad I got them though.

[KRose04]

Well.. I just had my ass handed to me on the con law set 3. I think I would've done better if I had just guessed x___x anyone else getting a panicked feeling that they won't pass?? That's starting to set in right now for me. Seriously considering buy those critical pass cards right now

You will be fine. I did that same set tonight and was thinking about making a similar post bc it gave me trouble too. It seemed to have a lot of questions on small shit that won't be heavily tested on the actual exam though. But some of those questions my response was "why and how in the fuck was I supposed to know that!?"

The flash cards seem helpful although overpriced. Im glad I got them though.

Lmao. Thanks for this. After doing them its like a raincloud has been hanging over my head, and I've been giving myself the "it's just an exam, if I have to take it again, it's not the end of the world" speech. On the previous 2 sets I scored right at the cutoff, I think 10 or 11 out of 18. But on this one, I scored HALF of that. It got to the point where I was wondering if I was even awake for the lecture (given how boring it was, this wouldn't have been so hard to believe lol)

ETA: I'm still on the fence about the cards. The only thing really stopping me is the fact that I typed out my own outlines, and I feel bad knowing all those hours I put into them would be for nothing. But I also think my outlines may be too detailed. They range from 10-15 pages each, and civ pro was 18! I would like something more straight forward. I downloaded leansheets, but they are TOO lean for me. Half the time I don't even understand what they mean, and then I have to look at the outline for an example, so I stopped using them. It pains me to pay another $110 after buying the leansheets for $40, but I'm really starting to panic

[sublime]

Lol. Yea, I'm mostly just trying to make sure I am competent in the big topics like commerce clause and ep, sdp, and first amendment. I'm not worrying all that much about not knowing exactly how the 11th amendment works, details about scotus jurisdiction, or the ways that congress can and can't mess with that jurisdiction, etc.

[sublime]

To your edit, yea the entire industry makes money off panicking. But at the same time, it may be worth it if it helps you relax.

If you are curious for more examples of what the flash cards look like to help you decide, pm me and I should be able to take a few pics to show you a few tomorrow.


I still need to make basic outlines. I started late and just caught up and also have adaptibar to mess with.

Are you guys outlining mee topics too?

[KRose04]

To your edit, yea the entire industry makes money off panicking. But at the same time, it may be worth it if it helps you relax.

If you are curious for more examples of what the flash cards look like to help you decide, pm me and I should be able to take a few pics to show you a few tomorrow.


I still need to make basic outlines. I started late and just caught up and also have adaptibar to mess with.

Are you guys outlining mee topics too?

What do you mean by basic outlines? To add to the critical pass cards? If I buy them, I'm going to write in some stuff from my own outlines, so I can at least say I used my outlines for SOMETHING lol. Anywho, what I'm doing for MEE is writing all the rules from the ones they have assigned so far. I'm making an outline based on topics. For example, so far for Wills, I have the rules for intestacy, republication, incorporation by reference, slayer statute, revocation by operation of law, ademption and stock dividends. Those are from like 2 or 3 of the essays. I'm going to keep adding to it, and then just study from those for the essays. I figure this way I'll focus on the most tested topics on the essays, and also study the MBE topics at the same time. I also bought some essays from the NCBE website too

[KRose04]

Have you guys been doing the personal homework assignments? I started out doing them, but then I stopped. I found them more annoying than helpful. I think I have about 31 sitting there now lol

[goden]

Well.. I just had my ass handed to me on the con law set 3. I think I would've done better if I had just guessed x___x anyone else getting a panicked feeling that they won't pass?? That's starting to set in right now for me. Seriously considering buy those critical pass cards right now

You will be fine. I did that same set tonight and was thinking about making a similar post bc it gave me trouble too. It seemed to have a lot of questions on small shit that won't be heavily tested on the actual exam though. But some of those questions my response was "why and how in the fuck was I supposed to know that!?"

The flash cards seem helpful although overpriced. Im glad I got them though.

Yeah this set ass fucked me too but I agree with what sublime said about most of the qs testing on seemingly unimportant details

[fauxpsych]

Have you guys been doing the personal homework assignments? I started out doing them, but then I stopped. I found them more annoying than helpful. I think I have about 31 sitting there now lol

The AMPlifire assignments (or whatever) have been helpful to me in brute forcing the rules for some concepts.

[imnottelling]

The AMPlifire assignments (or whatever) have been helpful to me in brute forcing the rules for some concepts.

Agreed. The AMP assignments are helpful. I generally do the lecture, do the corresponding AMPs, and then quickly reread over the lecture notes. That has helped tremendously. I also got the critical pass cards, which I am hoping will help me get the rules down in an articulate manner for the essays.

[KRose04]

Well.. I just had my ass handed to me on the con law set 3. I think I would've done better if I had just guessed x___x anyone else getting a panicked feeling that they won't pass?? That's starting to set in right now for me. Seriously considering buy those critical pass cards right now

You will be fine. I did that same set tonight and was thinking about making a similar post bc it gave me trouble too. It seemed to have a lot of questions on small shit that won't be heavily tested on the actual exam though. But some of those questions my response was "why and how in the fuck was I supposed to know that!?"

The flash cards seem helpful although overpriced. Im glad I got them though.

Yeah this set ass fucked me too but I agree with what sublime said about most of the qs testing on seemingly unimportant details

Lmao. I'm sorry the set was hard for you too, but I'm relieved to know it wasn't me. I was really starting to question what I've been doing with myself after I took that set

[Obama2016]

Wondering if someone can explain a ConLaw MBE question (Set 3, Question 6).

I picked B - The attorney has a property interest as a public employee that precludes her from being fired without notice and an opportunity to respond.

I get why A is correct (right to express views at work not in connection with job duties). But I don't understand why B is wrong, even after reading the explanation. I thought public employees are required to be given notice/hearing before being fired, unless it is made clear there is no expectation of property interest (e.g., University of Wisconsin employee who had contract that made it clear the employee should have no expectation to have the K renewed. Employee's K was not renewed, and sued. Lost - no expectation of property interest). I know the attorney was not in the union, but there's no requirement (to my knowledge) that public employees have to be in a union to receive notice/hearing prior to being fired.

Thanks in advance!

[LionelHutzJD]

I did slightly better on set 3 than on 4. Both were tough and probably unrepresentative of the con law questions we will see on exam day. Anyway, I'm taking today off to see Paul Simon in Forest Hills. Decided to not take July 4th off.

[LionelHutzJD]

Wondering if someone can explain a ConLaw MBE question (Set 3, Question 6).

I picked B - The attorney has a property interest as a public employee that precludes her from being fired without notice and an opportunity to respond.

I get why A is correct (right to express views at work not in connection with job duties). But I don't understand why B is wrong, even after reading the explanation. I thought public employees are required to be given notice/hearing before being fired, unless it is made clear there is no expectation of property interest (e.g., University of Wisconsin employee who had contract that made it clear the employee should have no expectation to have the K renewed. Employee's K was not renewed, and sued. Lost - no expectation of property interest). I know the attorney was not in the union, but there's no requirement (to my knowledge) that public employees have to be in a union to receive notice/hearing prior to being fired.

Thanks in advance!

The attorney had no legitimate expectancy interest/ claim of entitlement. Or whatever the correct wording is from Roth.

[sublime]

I got it wrong too. I don't think it was only because she wasn't in the union, but that she didn't have a contract either. The barbri xplanation basically said that if you are an at will employee, you don't have a property right in employment, and employees without a contract (either collective of individual) are at will, so don't require a hearing.

That's just what I got from the explanation though, I didn't cover PDP in LS>

[Bacon]

Wondering if someone can explain a ConLaw MBE question (Set 3, Question 6).

I picked B - The attorney has a property interest as a public employee that precludes her from being fired without notice and an opportunity to respond.

I get why A is correct (right to express views at work not in connection with job duties). But I don't understand why B is wrong, even after reading the explanation. I thought public employees are required to be given notice/hearing before being fired, unless it is made clear there is no expectation of property interest (e.g., University of Wisconsin employee who had contract that made it clear the employee should have no expectation to have the K renewed. Employee's K was not renewed, and sued. Lost - no expectation of property interest). I know the attorney was not in the union, but there's no requirement (to my knowledge) that public employees have to be in a union to receive notice/hearing prior to being fired.

Thanks in advance!

I also picked B, because I was also thinking of the teachers cases and how they had a reasonable expectation in their contract renewal.

However, I think B is incorrect because since the attorney wasn't in the union, the attorney was an at-will employee. I think they pointed out the rights in the union to point to the conclusion that because the attorney wasn't in the union, the attorney had no reasonable expectation to those rights and benefits that come with the union membership. Maybe we had to infer that only those in the union had those rights and therefore those outside the union didn't and would not be able to reasonably expect those rights? So then the liberty interest in answer A would be the correct answer. Like I said, I picked the same thing as you, so I could be way off in my thought process.

[sublime]

They really stretch agency out for 3 hours? Come on, Barbri. Esp with all the other shit we are supposed to do today

[Obama2016]

Wondering if someone can explain a ConLaw MBE question (Set 3, Question 6).

I picked B - The attorney has a property interest as a public employee that precludes her from being fired without notice and an opportunity to respond.

I get why A is correct (right to express views at work not in connection with job duties). But I don't understand why B is wrong, even after reading the explanation. I thought public employees are required to be given notice/hearing before being fired, unless it is made clear there is no expectation of property interest (e.g., University of Wisconsin employee who had contract that made it clear the employee should have no expectation to have the K renewed. Employee's K was not renewed, and sued. Lost - no expectation of property interest). I know the attorney was not in the union, but there's no requirement (to my knowledge) that public employees have to be in a union to receive notice/hearing prior to being fired.

Thanks in advance!

I also picked B, because I was also thinking of the teachers cases and how they had a reasonable expectation in their contract renewal.

However, I think B is incorrect because since the attorney wasn't in the union, the attorney was an at-will employee. I think they pointed out the rights in the union to point to the conclusion that because the attorney wasn't in the union, the attorney had no reasonable expectation to those rights and benefits that come with the union membership. Maybe we had to infer that only those in the union had those rights and therefore those outside the union didn't and would not be able to reasonably expect those rights? So then the liberty interest in answer A would be the correct answer. Like I said, I picked the same thing as you, so I could be way off in my thought process.

Thanks for the responses everyone. And that seems to be the best explanation here - that they wanted us to infer no reasonable expectation because she was not in the union.

[KRose04]

They really stretch agency out for 3 hours? Come on, Barbri. Esp with all the other shit we are supposed to do today

hahahaha yea I'm doing it now and I was thinking the same thing. 3 hours for a 20 page outline -__-

[sublime]

I didn't find COn Law 4 bad, but I think for a lot of these ticky tack questions it just has a lot to do with what you covered 1L. For example, we spent a good amount of time on Market Participant, Dormant CC, and preemption, so those were nbd, whereas if I didn't cover them, I would have had no idea.