BarBri Bar Review Hangout - July 2015 Exam Forum

[cdelgado]

When some of you say that you are confident on essays, what does that mean? 100%? 90%?

The more I look through my state's essays, the more I find that they are testing very narrow exceptions, which are sometimes hard to find or not in the materials.

[Outis Onoma]

When some of you say that you are confident on essays, what does that mean? 100%? 90%?

The more I look through my state's essays, the more I find that they are testing very narrow exceptions, which are sometimes hard to find or not in the materials.

UBE state here, but I'm pretty sure I'm going to be making up 99% of the rules. IF there's an advancement issue in a wills essay, I coudl probably make up rule that is close to correct and write a short paragraph applying it to the facts. I'm hoping that everyone else is as hopeless as I am.

[musicfor18]

When I learned PJ as a 1L, I distinctly remember learning that a corp was subject to general PJ in any state in which they had "systematic and continuous" contacts. Barbri appears to be teaching it differently: specific PJ where they have contacts (whether minimum or systematic and continuous) and general where they're at home (state of incorporation and state of nerve center).

Not sure if I'm interpreting Barbri wrong or just misstating the rules...

You're not misstating, but I can't imagine we'll have to distinguish between general and specific jx since the courts frequently can't and since personal jx or no personal jx is all that really matters.

If we have to do a PJ analysis on an essay, I'd prefer to be able to differentiate between the two and discuss the relevance (or lack thereof) of the claim's relatedness to their contacts with the forum state. If they have systematic and continuous contacts with a state, but are neither incorporated nor have their nerve center in that state, then this discrepancy between what I know and what Barbri is teaching is going to be an issue.

That said, this is probably the least of my concerns. I don't know my ass from my elbow when it comes to wills & trusts or community property and my essays in all subjects could generously be described as "mediocre."

SCOTUS decided Daimler after our 1L year, which clarified an ambiguity that existed until then, and on which you picked up here. Until Daimler, it was unclear in how many states a corporation could be sued under general jdx, since large corporations like walmart have extensive continuous and purposeful contacts with many states, such that they might presumably be considered at home in plenty of states. But in Daimler, the Court clarified that being "at home" for general jurisdiction purposes means, for a corporation, only the place of incorporation and the principal place of business.

http://www.scotusblog.com/case-files/ca ... -v-bauman/

This is right. Except I think Daimler arguably left room for the possibility that something other than state of incorporation and PPOB could, in the right case, support general PJ. But it definitely stands for the proposition that a corporation can only have a very limited number of places where it's "at home." This is clear because the Court said that, even if Daimler's subsidiary was "at home" in the forum state, and the subsidiary's contacts could be imputed to Daimler, Daimler still wouldn't be "at home" in the forum state because you have to look at all of Daimler's operations around the world and determine where it's most "at home." In sum, the test is not "systematic and continuous contacts" anymore. Instead,it's "what are the very small number of places that the corporation has its most systematic and continuous contacts?" For bar purposes, though, I think it's a best bet to go with what Freer said: "at home" = state/country of incorporation and PPOB.

If that's the case, that would mean that the answer to the Barbri question that we were discussing (MBE refresher) is almost certainly wrong. They said the corporation (incorporated in state C and PPOB in state D) was a resident of Southern District of State A due to having 20 of their 100 retail outlets there.

What Set/Question # is this? Also, did the claim arise in State A? Remember, a corporation is the resident, for venue purposes, of any state where it's subject to PJ for the lawsuit. This includes both general and specific PJ. So, if the claim arose out of the corporation's contacts in State A, then that would be good enough for venue.

[atticus89]

When some of you say that you are confident on essays, what does that mean? 100%? 90%?

The more I look through my state's essays, the more I find that they are testing very narrow exceptions, which are sometimes hard to find or not in the materials.

Having the same concerns. My issues aren't writing related, but I just can't seem to get myself to memorize all this state law, especially knowing that a large majority of it won't appear on the test at all. Can we just appreciate that for a minute -- major subjects that we are devoting valuable brain space to may not even be represented on the exam in any form. Just...wow.

I'm in CA and I feel like the essay standards are higher, though I obviously can't be sure. But on Baressays I've looked over several old essays and although they may misstate rules or miss an element or two, even the lowest passing answers tend to be in the ballpark. I've yet to see this 'make up a rule and apply it on the spot' strategy in action. Does anyone care to share?

[brotherdarkness]

When some of you say that you are confident on essays, what does that mean? 100%? 90%?

The more I look through my state's essays, the more I find that they are testing very narrow exceptions, which are sometimes hard to find or not in the materials.

Having the same concerns. My issues aren't writing related, but I just can't seem to get myself to memorize all this state law, especially knowing that a large majority of it won't appear on the test at all. Can we just appreciate that for a minute -- major subjects that we are devoting valuable brain space to may not even be represented on the exam in any form. Just...wow.

I'm in CA and I feel like the essay standards are higher, though I obviously can't be sure. But on Baressays I've looked over several old essays and although they may misstate rules or miss an element or two, even the lowest passing answers tend to be in the ballpark. I've yet to see this 'make up a rule and apply it on the spot' strategy in action. Does anyone care to share?

Also in CA. I've been working thru some of the past exams on the CA Bar website and looking at their model answers. Most of them have some mistakes -- whether in stating the rule or applying the rule. If this is the best that the CA Bar can cobble together for "models," I think we'll be ok. Plus, if you do well on the MBE, your essays can all be borderline pass/fail and you'll still pass the Bar.

[Barbro]

Someone indulge my anxiety for a second with a quick game of "Am I going to pass the NY bar" (40% MBE).

Finished all Barbri assignments, 127/200 on the practice MBE, 67/100 on the refresher, consistent 80%ish on the emmanuel questions. How much do I need to worry about the essays? I haven't written that many out.

[brotherdarkness]

Someone indulge my anxiety for a second with a quick game of "Am I going to pass the NY bar" (40% MBE).

Finished all Barbri assignments, 127/200 on the practice MBE, 67/100 on the refresher, consistent 80%ish on the emmanuel questions. How much do I need to worry about the essays? I haven't written that many out.

Try writing a few out. If they aren't complete dogshit, you'll be fine. If they suck, you've got a week to improve.

[brotherdarkness]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zT2ae1WkuC0

[charlesxavier]

When some of you say that you are confident on essays, what does that mean? 100%? 90%?

The more I look through my state's essays, the more I find that they are testing very narrow exceptions, which are sometimes hard to find or not in the materials.

It's killing me too. I might do a torts or crim law essay where there are a lot of relatively straight forward issues and feel great. Then I flip to evidence or civ pro and half the essays are asking very specific questions and testing a very narrow rule.

[3|ink]

Commercial paper Q

When, if ever, is a non-holder entitled to enforce an instrument aside from the Shelter Rule?

Farisee only discussed the shelter rule in the context of Holders in Due Course, so I got the idea that you have to at least be a holder to reap the benefits of the shelter rule. But what if you're not even a holder?

Before now, I just assumed non-holders were shit out of luck. But my baroutlines.com outline says a non-holder can also enforce as a holder if it acquired the instrument from a holder. That seems to be describing the shelter rule, but the outline doesn't elaborate. And it seems odd to me that a non-holder can avail himself of the shelter rule.

[Outis Onoma]

Commercial paper Q

When, if ever, is a non-holder entitled to enforce an instrument aside from the Shelter Rule?

Farisee only discussed the shelter rule in the context of Holders in Due Course, so I got the idea that you have to at least be a holder to reap the benefits of the shelter rule. But what if you're not even a holder?

Before now, I just assumed non-holders were shit out of luck. But my baroutlines.com outline says a non-holder can also enforce as a holder if it acquired the instrument from a holder. That seems to be describing the shelter rule, but the outline doesn't elaborate. And it seems odd to me that a non-holder can avail himself of the shelter rule.

No answer for you. Just bragging that I don't have to learn commercial paper.

[Neff]

Someone indulge my anxiety for a second with a quick game of "Am I going to pass the NY bar" (40% MBE).

Finished all Barbri assignments, 127/200 on the practice MBE, 67/100 on the refresher, consistent 80%ish on the emmanuel questions. How much do I need to worry about the essays? I haven't written that many out.

You're (almost) golden. 80% is about a 15% (raw) cushion for NY (Emanuel says an average state requires about 61%, Cal requires about 69%, so I'm guessing NY is somewhere in between). You can afford to seriously screw up on the essays.

[RaleighStClair]

Ended up getting 153/200 on the Emanuel MBE. Weird feelings on that...happy with the score but I honestly was guessing between two answer choices on 70-80% of the questions, and was expecting to complete fail. Is that normal?

Got 118 on the BarBri midterm for what it's worth.

[Hutz_and_Goodman]

My takeaway is Barbri is bullshit. Some of these mc questions a law professor teaching the subject would not get 100%. There's no way these can be real questions when you have Geraldo Rivera and many other rewards passing the bar.

[BVest]

What Set/Question # is this? Also, did the claim arise in State A? Remember, a corporation is the resident, for venue purposes, of any state where it's subject to PJ for the lawsuit. This includes both general and specific PJ. So, if the claim arose out of the corporation's contacts in State A, then that would be good enough for venue.

Damn... you're right. It happened in SD A and D2 was from CD A. As a result of it happening SD A, company (D1) was subject to Specific Jx throughout the state of A and was therefore a resident of state A. So it could be in the district where it happened or in the district where one of the defendants (the driver) resided.

[BVest]

Also remember that expectation damages will always be highest because restitution and reliance damages can never exceed expectation damages. The reason one might pick restitution damages or reliance damages over expectation damages is usually because they're easier to prove.

Page 111 of the big outline suggest you'd shoot for restitution because it exceeds expectation.

And you are also right. That said, restitution is an equitable remedy and therefore can be limited by the judge to the K price/expectation damages. Also, restitution is not available to a non-breaching party who has fully performed and just needs to get paid.

[Good Guy Gaud]

One more week.

C'mon everyone, we can do this.

CAN'T STOP WON'T STOP

[musicfor18]

One more week.

C'mon everyone, we can do this.

CAN'T STOP WON'T STOP

Is there anyone else who hasn't touched the MPT at all, even the graded one?

[old_soul]

When some of you say that you are confident on essays, what does that mean? 100%? 90%?

The more I look through my state's essays, the more I find that they are testing very narrow exceptions, which are sometimes hard to find or not in the materials.

It's killing me too. I might do a torts or crim law essay where there are a lot of relatively straight forward issues and feel great. Then I flip to evidence or civ pro and half the essays are asking very specific questions and testing a very narrow rule.

+1 I'm in the same boat. Some of the essays are testing on very very narrow state specifics. My state actually cares about the conclusion, not just arguments on both sides, so if you miss the narrow exception, you're already screwed for getting the wrong result in many instances. I'm trying to make sure that I get to a point where I can write about 6.5ish/10ish on most essays, and maybe have a couple of topics I know to a 8/9 level, judging just in terms of my comfort in the ability to regurgitate rules and general feelings towards a topic.

I feel like that combined with at least a 130 MBE will take me through the pass range.

[myrtlewinston]

Can someone help me with a NY wills question? What is NY's stance on the will execution witness also being a beneficiary? I feel like I've seen different analyses in essays - one said interested witness status no long affects the validity of the will, the other said if one witness is interested you need 2 additional disinterested witnesses

I believe that it depends on whether the interested witness would take if the will is declared invalid. If the interested witness would inherit (ex. son of the testator) then you do not need an additional witness for the will to be valid (son + disinterested witness is enough). The will is valid but the son inherits the lesser of what he would inherit under the will or if the decedent died intestate. If the interested witness would not inherit if the will is deemed invalid (ex. a friend of testator), then the will is invalid unless there are at least 2 disinterested witnesses.

Again, I believe that the above is correct but would be happy to have clarification if this is wrong.

An witness may keep a bequest made to him if there are at least two other non-interested witnesses AND his testimony is not required to probate the will.

An interested witness doesn't affect the validity of the will. However, the gift/bequest is void to this interested witness unless an exception applies: (1) supernumerary (i.e., there are two disinterested witnesses to this will so this interested witness's attestation is not needed), or (2) interested witness/beneficiary is an heir (in this case, the beneficiary takes the smaller of (i) intestate share, or (ii) gift under the will). That is my understanding from both the essays and the NY-specific outline. Obviously, take it with a grain of salt.

What I wrote is the supernumerary rule. A gift to a witness does not void the will. However, if there is a will contest, a witness may be called upon to testify. Hence, the second provision to the rule.

[myrtlewinston]

One more week.

C'mon everyone, we can do this.

CAN'T STOP WON'T STOP

Is there anyone else who hasn't touched the MPT at all, even the graded one?

Me. I had a godawful week. Spent Friday night in the Animal ER.

[Kage3212]

One more week.

C'mon everyone, we can do this.

CAN'T STOP WON'T STOP

Is there anyone else who hasn't touched the MPT at all, even the graded one?

Me. I had a godawful week. Spent Friday night in the Animal ER.

Spend at least a half day (or maybe full day) just working on them. I hadn't really touched them, did one, and was freaking out because I had no idea how to approach the problem. Spent a little time going through 6 or 7 and realized that there is pretty much a regular breakdown on how to approach things, and so long as you know how that's generally done, you should feel comfortable with it on test day.

[victortsoi]

One more week.

C'mon everyone, we can do this.

CAN'T STOP WON'T STOP

Is there anyone else who hasn't touched the MPT at all, even the graded one?

Me. I had a godawful week. Spent Friday night in the Animal ER.

Spend at least a half day (or maybe full day) just working on them. I hadn't really touched them, did one, and was freaking out because I had no idea how to approach the problem. Spent a little time going through 6 or 7 and realized that there is pretty much a regular breakdown on how to approach things, and so long as you know how that's generally done, you should feel comfortable with it on test day.

same here. At this point it might be better to just read them like stories- library, memo, then barbri answer. Dont just read, think about the answer and see the patterns in the models. It's kinda what I've been doing with essays.

[Kage3212]

To add a more light-hearted nature to the thread, what are everyone's plans after the bar?

Girlfriend and I are heading to South Beach two days after the exam for 2 nights, followed by a 4 day Caribbean cruise, then 2 more days in South Beach. This will actually be my first "major" vacation like trip so I am absolutely stoked. Curious to hear what others have planned.

[victortsoi]

To add a more light-hearted nature to the thread, what are everyone's plans after the bar?

Girlfriend and I are heading to South Beach two days after the exam for 2 nights, followed by a 4 day Caribbean cruise, then 2 more days in South Beach. This will actually be my first "major" vacation like trip so I am absolutely stoked. Curious to hear what others have planned.

dont have a job lined up so probably am going to have a blast the first week, followed by a certain kind of mania unique to law students, since the structure provided by barbri(feels great to feed our OCD) dissapears, yet we are still anxious and anal. Go camping and then play some video games