Themis Bar Review Hangout - July 2017 Forum

[jc2dad]

Just now checking in here. Glad to find this hangout. Taking July 17 Texas bar. Started a little behind with the program, at 24% currently. Plan to catch up in the next week. Getting great feedback on the graded essays scores of 19 and 20 on the first two, but struggling at hitting the goal in certain subjects on the MBE. Is anyone else having difficulty on the MBE questions?

[lavarman84]

I really like the Themis property professor and am enjoying property (as crazy as that sounds).

so nice to move from property to torts....

+1 to that. Though Kramer was a more entertaining lecturer than Clark is.

Clark was terrible.

Kramer was so much better than Clark.

Kramer was better than Clark but now that I'm done with his lectures and doing the Property practice questions, I'm consistently getting only around 50% or less correct. I know the material in property is hard, but I didn't think it would be THAT hard. Kramer's lectures didn't really help at all with the tough stuff -- mortgages, deeds, foreclosures.

I will agree with that based on the content of the MBE practice questions. I'm all over the place with the percent correct on the questions. One set will be 50, next will be 70, next will be 45 percent.

I think Property is just a difficult subject. I'm not looking forward to the hard MBE practice questions. My first set was really easy.

[michelle3908]

Here's a sort of helpful video for mortgages: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ShBjbw4to4Y

They also have some other property concepts going on in other videos. I thought I would just send it along!

Thanks! Any and all help is appreciated

[Tati718]

I prefer Kramer AND Clark over Schott. I thought I was done w/ Schott after family law but he does the evidence vids as well

I got nothing out of the evidence videos. I just don't think it's the best way for me to learn evidence. I'm using my old evidence outline instead. It also didn't help that Schott was way too f'ing friendly when I was watching him hungover

Same, his lectures just aren't doing it for me! I am going to have to use my notes and outline from class as well. Aren't we glad we took the course in law school ha

[MelaPela]

I prefer Kramer AND Clark over Schott. I thought I was done w/ Schott after family law but he does the evidence vids as well

I got nothing out of the evidence videos. I just don't think it's the best way for me to learn evidence. I'm using my old evidence outline instead. It also didn't help that Schott was way too f'ing friendly when I was watching him hungover

Same, his lectures just aren't doing it for me! I am going to have to use my notes and outline from class as well. Aren't we glad we took the course in law school ha

Also using my old evidence outline instead of going through his lectures. He *thinks* he's being so clear but is so unclear.

[Slytherpuff]

Civ Pro is pretty chill so far. This is probably the subject I remember most from law school. I just wish we had access to real questions!

[almondjoy]

CA remedies lecturer is soooo bad.

[MelaPela]

Did anyone else find the MEE Essay Exam #1 Property question really hard? I missed a ton of issues because of the way question was worded. Ugh.

[whats an updog]

CA remedies lecturer is soooo bad.

I didn't think she was that bad at the time, but I don't know anything about remedies, so maybe she was pretty bad.

[Law4lyf]

Can someone explain to me the difference between Joinder of Claims and Supplemental Jurisdiction?

[Law4lyf]

Can someone explain to me the difference between Joinder of Claims and Supplemental Jurisdiction?

I think I may have figured it out....

Joinder of Claims applies to completely unrelated legal claims that do not arise out of common facts of the case, while Supplemental Jurisdiction refers to unrelated legal claims that arise out of the Common facts.

[yeslekkkk]

Can someone explain to me the difference between Joinder of Claims and Supplemental Jurisdiction?

I think I may have figured it out....

Joinder of Claims applies to completely unrelated legal claims that do not arise out of common facts of the case, while Supplemental Jurisdiction refers to unrelated legal claims that arise out of the Common facts.

I recommend watching a Kaplan video on YouTube about joinder. It's not what this person is saying. Sorry to go against you. You have to look at whether the claim can be joined and then look at whether there is SMJ. Some e will be brought in with supplemental. Some will require it t to independently have SMJ. I don't think Themis does a good job on this. I'm still working through it too.

[whats an updog]

Can someone explain to me the difference between Joinder of Claims and Supplemental Jurisdiction?

I think I may have figured it out....

Joinder of Claims applies to completely unrelated legal claims that do not arise out of common facts of the case, while Supplemental Jurisdiction refers to unrelated legal claims that arise out of the Common facts.

I recommend watching a Kaplan video on YouTube about joinder. It's not what this person is saying. Sorry to go against you. You have to look at whether the claim can be joined and then look at whether there is SMJ. Some e will be brought in with supplemental. Some will require it t to independently have SMJ. I don't think Themis does a good job on this. I'm still working through it too.

This is correct. Joinder of claims doesn't give a court jurisdiction over those claims.

Any claim can be joined if it is by the same plaintiff against the same defendant. You can aggregate all joined claims by the same plaintiff against the same defendant for the purposes of meeting AIC. This will help it to get DJ, but if DJ can't be established, the joined claims must get SMJ from either federal question or supplemental jurisdiction.

[pvnyc]

I am having so much trouble remember the rules... it seems that when I do the MEEs, I just blank out. I need to build on my technique. And I think issue spotting is a big issue for me. I try to organize my essays, but then I miss so much.

[DvlDog5150]

Can someone explain to me the difference between Joinder of Claims and Supplemental Jurisdiction?

JOINDER will raise the issue of Subject Matter Jurisdiction - That is STEP 1!! You are trying to join a CLAIM- so

EVERY SINGLE CLAIM must invoke SMJ (either a Federal Question or Diveristy + >$75k), if NOT, go to Supplemental Jurisdiction

STEPS:

A. Claim Joinder by the Plaintiff: P can join any claim she has (claims don’t have to be related) against D. You can put 43 different claims under 43 different laws if you want. But you need subject matter jx- so each of those claims has to either be a federal question or qualify based on diversity.

B. IF NO Federal Question or Diversity- Can you get in the claim through Supplemental JX? - TEST – You can get the claim in if it shares a common nucleus of operative fact with first claim. Test: Supp. Jx is ALWAYS available if the claims arise from the same transaction or occurrence (T/O).

C. BUT!!! Don't forget!!! Exception on Supplemental JX- 1367(b)-Does 1367 B take away that jurisdiction? APPLIES ONLY IN DIVERSITY CASES- NEVER APPLIES TO FQ CASES. Takes away Supp Juris over diversity case claims by the Plaintiff – NOT the Defendant.

Plaintiff can join claim if they meet SMJ (Fed Q or Diversity)- but if they don't meet diversity, they can't join the claim- no joinder - no supplemental. But if the Plaintiff doesn't have SMJ at all- can join the claim through supplemental jx on a Fed. Q

Defendant - same rules but can join claims under supplemental jx with or without Fed Q / Diversity- provided the claim arises from same T/O

[Law4lyf]

Can someone explain to me the difference between Joinder of Claims and Supplemental Jurisdiction?

JOINDER will raise the issue of Subject Matter Jurisdiction - That is STEP 1!! You are trying to join a CLAIM- so

EVERY SINGLE CLAIM must invoke SMJ (either a Federal Question or Diveristy + >$75k), if NOT, go to Supplemental Jurisdiction

STEPS:

A. Claim Joinder by the Plaintiff: P can join any claim she has (claims don’t have to be related) against D. You can put 43 different claims under 43 different laws if you want. But you need subject matter jx- so each of those claims has to either be a federal question or qualify based on diversity.

B. IF NO Federal Question or Diversity- Can you get in the claim through Supplemental JX? - TEST – You can get the claim in if it shares a common nucleus of operative fact with first claim. Test: Supp. Jx is ALWAYS available if the claims arise from the same transaction or occurrence (T/O).

C. BUT!!! Don't forget!!! Exception on Supplemental JX- 1367(b)-Does 1367 B take away that jurisdiction? APPLIES ONLY IN DIVERSITY CASES- NEVER APPLIES TO FQ CASES. Takes away Supp Juris over diversity case claims by the Plaintiff – NOT the Defendant.

Plaintiff can join claim if they meet SMJ (Fed Q or Diversity)- but if they don't meet diversity, they can't join the claim- no joinder - no supplemental. But if the Plaintiff doesn't have SMJ at all- can join the claim through supplemental jx on a Fed. Q

Defendant - same rules but can join claims under supplemental jx with or without Fed Q / Diversity- provided the claim arises from same T/O

So if Plaintiff brings a claim based on FQ could he bring an unrelated torts claim (only worth $40) that does not arise out of the same transaction? ( Look at the long outline on page 55 under c.)

[yeslekkkk]

Can someone explain to me the difference between Joinder of Claims and Supplemental Jurisdiction?

JOINDER will raise the issue of Subject Matter Jurisdiction - That is STEP 1!! You are trying to join a CLAIM- so

EVERY SINGLE CLAIM must invoke SMJ (either a Federal Question or Diveristy + >$75k), if NOT, go to Supplemental Jurisdiction

STEPS:

A. Claim Joinder by the Plaintiff: P can join any claim she has (claims don’t have to be related) against D. You can put 43 different claims under 43 different laws if you want. But you need subject matter jx- so each of those claims has to either be a federal question or qualify based on diversity.

B. IF NO Federal Question or Diversity- Can you get in the claim through Supplemental JX? - TEST – You can get the claim in if it shares a common nucleus of operative fact with first claim. Test: Supp. Jx is ALWAYS available if the claims arise from the same transaction or occurrence (T/O).

C. BUT!!! Don't forget!!! Exception on Supplemental JX- 1367(b)-Does 1367 B take away that jurisdiction? APPLIES ONLY IN DIVERSITY CASES- NEVER APPLIES TO FQ CASES. Takes away Supp Juris over diversity case claims by the Plaintiff – NOT the Defendant.

Plaintiff can join claim if they meet SMJ (Fed Q or Diversity)- but if they don't meet diversity, they can't join the claim- no joinder - no supplemental. But if the Plaintiff doesn't have SMJ at all- can join the claim through supplemental jx on a Fed. Q

Defendant - same rules but can join claims under supplemental jx with or without Fed Q / Diversity- provided the claim arises from same T/O

So if Plaintiff brings a claim based on FQ could he bring an unrelated torts claim (only worth $40) that does not arise out of the same transaction? ( Look at the long outline on page 55 under c.)

If the original claim is based on FQ (as you say), then he can only bring a state law claim (non federal claim) if diversity jurisdiction exists or if that claim is part of the same case or controversy (using supplemental jx). So above, there's no diversity since the hook is FQ. He can't bring that tort claim if it is unrelated.

[the_pakalypse]

Is anyone finding the time allocations unrealistic? Always feel like I'm working much more than 8 hours most days

[SplitMyPants]

anyone else feel pretty comfortable with the torts MBE pq's but terrible with the torts practice essays?

[helpappreciated]

anyone else feel pretty comfortable with the torts MBE pq's but terrible with the torts practice essays?

I feel the same way.

[Slytherpuff]

Is anyone finding the time allocations unrealistic? Always feel like I'm working much more than 8 hours most days

This, except I'm finding there just aren't enough hours in the day to complete all the tasks so I keep falling further behind instead of catching up. And then I get progressively more assigned each day in an effort to get my schedule to 100% completion. Like, I'm sorry I can't spend 12 hours a day on this, Themis?

[lavarman84]

Is anyone finding the time allocations unrealistic? Always feel like I'm working much more than 8 hours most days

This, except I'm finding there just aren't enough hours in the day to complete all the tasks so I keep falling further behind instead of catching up. And then I get progressively more assigned each day in an effort to get my schedule to 100% completion. Like, I'm sorry I can't spend 12 hours a day on this, Themis?

You must be reading the outlines.

[J-english]

Is anyone finding the time allocations unrealistic? Always feel like I'm working much more than 8 hours most days

This, except I'm finding there just aren't enough hours in the day to complete all the tasks so I keep falling further behind instead of catching up. And then I get progressively more assigned each day in an effort to get my schedule to 100% completion. Like, I'm sorry I can't spend 12 hours a day on this, Themis?

You must be reading the outlines.

My problem is that one day I will get everything done in like 5 hours and the following day its like 10 hours. I wish it would even itself out a little better.

I do not read the big outline in-depth. I only use them to clarify stuff that I keep getting wrong and to make review cards for harder concepts. Definitely don't read the outlines unless that's how you learn best. I was told by my Themis person that the outlines should be skimmed and you shouldn't spend more then an hour on the initial read.

[Jon_Snow]

Is anyone finding the time allocations unrealistic? Always feel like I'm working much more than 8 hours most days

This, except I'm finding there just aren't enough hours in the day to complete all the tasks so I keep falling further behind instead of catching up. And then I get progressively more assigned each day in an effort to get my schedule to 100% completion. Like, I'm sorry I can't spend 12 hours a day on this, Themis?

You must be reading the outlines.

My problem is that one day I will get everything done in like 5 hours and the following day its like 10 hours. I wish it would even itself out a little better.

I do not read the big outline in-depth. I only use them to clarify stuff that I keep getting wrong and to make review cards for harder concepts. Definitely don't read the outlines unless that's how you learn best. I was told by my Themis person that the outlines should be skimmed and you shouldn't spend more then an hour on the initial read.

Lol. I spent almost a whole day going over Contracts outline the first time it was assigned.

Has anyone else actually reached out or talked to Themis folks? Have they been helpful? All I've gotten so far are generic messages on the Themis message box.

[foundingfather]

Is anyone finding the time allocations unrealistic? Always feel like I'm working much more than 8 hours most days

This, except I'm finding there just aren't enough hours in the day to complete all the tasks so I keep falling further behind instead of catching up. And then I get progressively more assigned each day in an effort to get my schedule to 100% completion. Like, I'm sorry I can't spend 12 hours a day on this, Themis?

you're not alone - like another poster above said, sometimes I will finish everything in a few hours. other days (most days) I will not finish the assigned tasks and it keeps piling on work.

sometimes real life happens and I don't get to study that day. and I started two weeks late on top of that

just keep on truckin' Slytherpuff