How confident do you feel? Forum

[yankeeman86]

Barbri once said not to worry much about time constraints, most people don't have issues with time.

This seems true, as about half the test takers left the room (very noisily) before the end of the exam.

I bubbled randomly for the last three q's because I had 30 seconds left

those people probably got a lot of trap questions wrong. You had to read both the question and answers carefully otherwise, it was easy to select the trap answer. there were quite a few of them in the more difficult session. also for the difficult session which was the last session, i thought the last three were way too easy. probably will be deemed as "experimental".

[iOwnBlackacre]

Hypothetically speaking: Jack is running away from a vicious dog, Bruno. Jack jumps the fence into Jason's yard. Jason points a gun at him and says: leave or I'll shoot. Jack begs and pleads with Jason, but ultimately decided he'd rather be bitten than shot. Jack jumps back over the fence and low and behold, he's mauled by Bruno.

Jason do anything wrong to a trespasser here? Does the fact that Bruno is not Jason's dog have any effect on the answer?

[cnk1220]

.

[iOwnBlackacre]

hypothetically, does a home owner breach a duty if he kicks me off his yard knowing that a group of thugs on waiting on the other side of the fence to beat me and they in fact do beat me?

With your hypothetical, no because no duty to rescue. But the answer might be different if he threatened you with a gun because I don't think you can defend your property with deadly force but also, hypothetically, the bar examiners wouldn't have that as an explanation in the answer choice...

[iOwnBlackacre]

Hypothetically speaking: Jack is running away from a vicious dog, Bruno. Jack jumps the fence into Jason's yard. Jason points a gun at him and says: leave or I'll shoot. Jack begs and pleads with Jason, but ultimately decided he'd rather be bitten than shot. Jack jumps back over the fence and low and behold, he's mauled by Bruno.

Jason do anything wrong to a trespasser here? Does the fact that Bruno is not Jason's dog have any effect on the answer?

I think this is still a "can't use deadly force to protect your property" principle.

I agree. Decided it was a breach of duty owed to trespassers. Sloppy way of wording the answer choice though...

[Chevron Deference]

Hypothetically speaking: Jack is running away from a vicious dog, Bruno. Jack jumps the fence into Jason's yard. Jason points a gun at him and says: leave or I'll shoot. Jack begs and pleads with Jason, but ultimately decided he'd rather be bitten than shot. Jack jumps back over the fence and low and behold, he's mauled by Bruno.

Jason do anything wrong to a trespasser here? Does the fact that Bruno is not Jason's dog have any effect on the answer?

I think this is still a "can't use deadly force to protect your property" principle.

I agree. Decided it was a breach of duty owed to trespassers. Sloppy way of wording the answer choice though...

Necessity right? So the owner could not exclude him off of the property if the owner knew that the trespasser was in danger.

[cal_pushed]

Defendant proving any facts not element of case?

[yankeeman86]

Hypothetically speaking: Jack is running away from a vicious dog, Bruno. Jack jumps the fence into Jason's yard. Jason points a gun at him and says: leave or I'll shoot. Jack begs and pleads with Jason, but ultimately decided he'd rather be bitten than shot. Jack jumps back over the fence and low and behold, he's mauled by Bruno.

Jason do anything wrong to a trespasser here? Does the fact that Bruno is not Jason's dog have any effect on the answer?

I think this is still a "can't use deadly force to protect your property" principle.

I agree. Decided it was a breach of duty owed to trespassers. Sloppy way of wording the answer choice though...

Necessity right? So the owner could not exclude him off of the property if the owner knew that the trespasser was in danger.

Here is a random rule I f searched from my notes. Does it matter if the other side of the fence is not part of the owner's property?

"A landowner has no duty to keep premises in a safe condition for the benefit of trespassers. An owner does not possess any duty to a trespasser under the traditional common law view except to abstain from willful or wanton misconduct or entrapment"

I guess it does not matter if under the necessity rule, the owner has a duty. I hope so because that's what I would have chosen.

[cal_pushed]

Hypothetically speaking: Jack is running away from a vicious dog, Bruno. Jack jumps the fence into Jason's yard. Jason points a gun at him and says: leave or I'll shoot. Jack begs and pleads with Jason, but ultimately decided he'd rather be bitten than shot. Jack jumps back over the fence and low and behold, he's mauled by Bruno.

Jason do anything wrong to a trespasser here? Does the fact that Bruno is not Jason's dog have any effect on the answer?

There's a rule concerning privilege to trespass, and a land owners inability to use force to remove the person when the harm sought to be avoided is less then the harm being caused.


I think this is still a "can't use deadly force to protect your property" principle.

I agree. Decided it was a breach of duty owed to trespassers. Sloppy way of wording the answer choice though...

Necessity right? So the owner could not exclude him off of the property if the owner knew that the trespasser was in danger.

Here is a random rule I f searched from my notes. Does it matter if the other side of the fence is not part of the owner's property?

"A landowner has no duty to keep premises in a safe condition for the benefit of trespassers. An owner does not possess any duty to a trespasser under the traditional common law view except to abstain from willful or wanton misconduct or entrapment"

[cal_pushed]

Hypothetically speaking: Jack is running away from a vicious dog, Bruno. Jack jumps the fence into Jason's yard. Jason points a gun at him and says: leave or I'll shoot. Jack begs and pleads with Jason, but ultimately decided he'd rather be bitten than shot. Jack jumps back over the fence and low and behold, he's mauled by Bruno.

Jason do anything wrong to a trespasser here? Does the fact that Bruno is not Jason's dog have any effect on the answer?

There's a rule concerning privilege to trespass, and a land owners inability to use force to remove the person when the harm sought to be avoided is less then the harm being caused.


I think this is still a "can't use deadly force to protect your property" principle.

I agree. Decided it was a breach of duty owed to trespassers. Sloppy way of wording the answer choice though...

Necessity right? So the owner could not exclude him off of the property if the owner knew that the trespasser was in danger.

Here is a random rule I f searched from my notes. Does it matter if the other side of the fence is not part of the owner's property?

"A landowner has no duty to keep premises in a safe condition for the benefit of trespassers. An owner does not possess any duty to a trespasser under the traditional common law view except to abstain from willful or wanton misconduct or entrapment"

[lawdeeedaw]

What Action Is Allowed to Eject Trespassers? If a trespasser is discovered, the proper action is to ask the trespasser to leave. If that fails, the landowner should call the police. The landowner is not allowed to use "self help" methods to eject the trespasser. This means that a landowner cannot forcefully remove a trespasser from their land. A landowner also may not detain a trespasser while waiting for police to arrive.

http://www.legalmatch.com/law-library/a ... BWIzM.dpuf

[mycoxsafloppin]

What Action Is Allowed to Eject Trespassers? If a trespasser is discovered, the proper action is to ask the trespasser to leave. If that fails, the landowner should call the police. The landowner is not allowed to use "self help" methods to eject the trespasser. This means that a landowner cannot forcefully remove a trespasser from their land. A landowner also may not detain a trespasser while waiting for police to arrive.

http://www.legalmatch.com/law-library/a ... BWIzM.dpuf

You have a duty to discovered trespassers. I think that is where this question was going...albeit in a convoluted way.

[cal_pushed]

What Action Is Allowed to Eject Trespassers? If a trespasser is discovered, the proper action is to ask the trespasser to leave. If that fails, the landowner should call the police. The landowner is not allowed to use "self help" methods to eject the trespasser. This means that a landowner cannot forcefully remove a trespasser from their land. A landowner also may not detain a trespasser while waiting for police to arrive.

http://www.legalmatch.com/law-library/a ... BWIzM.dpuf

You have a duty to discovered trespassers. I think that is where this question was going...albeit in a convoluted way.

Necessity defense to trespass, creating privilege. Google ploof v putnam. Something like that. Also in Barbri outlines/ review.

[CanIScream]

So, completely hypothetically: A woman walks through TSA at the airport, looking shifty, and her X-ray shows something weird in her stomach which officer suspects is [a whole bunch of scary drugs]. Woman is rushed to the hospital where she indeed passes a whole bunch of heroin/coke balloons. Thereafter, woman is arrested and is charged. She moves to suppress the evidence of the drugs on the grounds that the search was illegal.

Whoa, what a scenario. I'm not good at remembering how I would word a 4th am hypo, but—Illegal search?

[CanIScream]

What Action Is Allowed to Eject Trespassers? If a trespasser is discovered, the proper action is to ask the trespasser to leave. If that fails, the landowner should call the police. The landowner is not allowed to use "self help" methods to eject the trespasser. This means that a landowner cannot forcefully remove a trespasser from their land. A landowner also may not detain a trespasser while waiting for police to arrive.

http://www.legalmatch.com/law-library/a ... BWIzM.dpuf

You have a duty to discovered trespassers. I think that is where this question was going...albeit in a convoluted way.

Necessity defense to trespass, creating privilege. Google ploof v putnam. Something like that. Also in Barbri outlines/ review.

Necessity for sure. Actually, I don't know what I would pick IRL because it's hard to predict what 4 answer choices might be given for such a question, given that the NCBE seems to be testing normal areas of law in weird ways. I've heard stories that recently at least two MBE questions had just straight up "No." as an answer choice, or even a "what if D was required to say 'put em up'." If there were 1 or 2 other plausible choices for this type of landowner/dog chase q, I might pick one...depending on what they looked like

[mycoxsafloppin]

So, completely hypothetically: A woman walks through TSA at the airport, looking shifty, and her X-ray shows something weird in her stomach which officer suspects is [a whole bunch of scary drugs]. Woman is rushed to the hospital where she indeed passes a whole bunch of heroin/coke balloons. Thereafter, woman is arrested and is charged. She moves to suppress the evidence of the drugs on the grounds that the search was illegal.

Whoa, what a scenario. I'm not good at remembering how I would word a 4th am hypo, but—Illegal search?

No reasonable expectation of privacy?

[yankeeman86]

No reasonable expectation of privacy at borders. Customs agents can do whatever.

[Zebra]

No reasonable expectation of privacy at borders. Customs agents can do whatever.

I thought it was exceeding the scope and intrusion on something rule don't remember the exact language

[btown]

I thought that the search would be ok based on the Border Search Exception, but after reading up on it I'm not for sure.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Border_search_exception

[seeyouatthenextexam]

based on this discussion, pretty sure i failed.

Same.

I went in to the MBE a bit cocky because I scored very decent on the Barbri full day and refresher exams... Big mistake. I deserve what I get for not researching that I should've used actual past MBE questions and not relied on Barbri (didn't research enough to know they were available until the day before the exam).

I felt violated when I left that exam.

don't be so certain. who knows what the answer is.

True ... I just feel so "ugh" about that MBE. There were two that I outright guessed on; 75 that I narrowed it down to two choices; and the other 123 I felt decent about my choice ... And I'm sure a few of those I felt decent about are incorrect from the discussions I've seen on the hypos. I'm going to be that person that fails by 1.2 pts. So much worse that just bombing it.

[umichman]

based on this discussion, pretty sure i failed.

Same.

I went in to the MBE a bit cocky because I scored very decent on the Barbri full day and refresher exams... Big mistake. I deserve what I get for not researching that I should've used actual past MBE questions and not relied on Barbri (didn't research enough to know they were available until the day before the exam).

I felt violated when I left that exam.

don't be so certain. who knows what the answer is.

True ... I just feel so "ugh" about that MBE. There were two that I outright guessed on; 75 that I narrowed it down to two choices; and the other 123 I felt decent about my choice ... And I'm sure a few of those I felt decent about are incorrect from the discussions I've seen on the hypos. I'm going to be that person that fails by 1.2 pts. So much worse that just bombing it.

dude, if you got 100 of those you felt comfortable right adn half of the rest, you are sitting pretty. I definitely felt confidence on less than 123

[seeyouatthenextexam]

based on this discussion, pretty sure i failed.

Same.

I went in to the MBE a bit cocky because I scored very decent on the Barbri full day and refresher exams... Big mistake. I deserve what I get for not researching that I should've used actual past MBE questions and not relied on Barbri (didn't research enough to know they were available until the day before the exam).

I felt violated when I left that exam.

don't be so certain. who knows what the answer is.

True ... I just feel so "ugh" about that MBE. There were two that I outright guessed on; 75 that I narrowed it down to two choices; and the other 123 I felt decent about my choice ... And I'm sure a few of those I felt decent about are incorrect from the discussions I've seen on the hypos. I'm going to be that person that fails by 1.2 pts. So much worse that just bombing it.

dude, if you got 100 of those you felt comfortable right adn half of the rest, you are sitting pretty. I definitely felt confidence on less than 123

It'd probably help if I had any idea how the UBE is scored ... I really have no idea (again, I did no research until after the violation of my person that occurred during that exam). Every which way I have figured it in my head is that if I don't get at least 125 MBE questions correct, I'm screwed. I hope I'm wrong. I also wish I had found this site while studying for the bar.

I've Googled, trying to figure out how it's scored; looked at NCBE's site; and I still can't figure it out. Too many standard deviation comments that turn my brain off when I read them - calculations = why I chose law school over pharmacy school.

[yankeeman86]

I thought that the search would be ok based on the Border Search Exception, but after reading up on it I'm not for sure.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Border_search_exception

Lol

[yankeeman86]

based on this discussion, pretty sure i failed.

Same.

I went in to the MBE a bit cocky because I scored very decent on the Barbri full day and refresher exams... Big mistake. I deserve what I get for not researching that I should've used actual past MBE questions and not relied on Barbri (didn't research enough to know they were available until the day before the exam).

I felt violated when I left that exam.

don't be so certain. who knows what the answer is.

True ... I just feel so "ugh" about that MBE. There were two that I outright guessed on; 75 that I narrowed it down to two choices; and the other 123 I felt decent about my choice ... And I'm sure a few of those I felt decent about are incorrect from the discussions I've seen on the hypos. I'm going to be that person that fails by 1.2 pts. So much worse that just bombing it.

dude, if you got 100 of those you felt comfortable right adn half of the rest, you are sitting pretty. I definitely felt confidence on less than 123

It'd probably help if I had any idea how the UBE is scored ... I really have no idea (again, I did no research until after the violation of my person that occurred during that exam). Every which way I have figured it in my head is that if I don't get at least 125 MBE questions correct, I'm screwed. I hope I'm wrong. I also wish I had found this site while studying for the bar.

I've Googled, trying to figure out how it's scored; looked at NCBE's site; and I still can't figure it out. Too many standard deviation comments that turn my brain off when I read them - calculations = why I chose law school over pharmacy school.

65% is the minimum. That's 113/114 out of 175. Do you think you got more than 60 questions wrong?

[yankeeman86]

No reasonable expectation of privacy at borders. Customs agents can do whatever.

I thought it was exceeding the scope and intrusion on something rule don't remember the exact language

Doubt it, they can look into your cell phone dude. Have you not been reading the news? Border exception is scary.