July 2015 California Bar Exam Forum

[hotsummer]

OMG, thank you so much, a male human!! I am so glad that I asked. Luckily I did try several from your list though, may try other ones too!!! Thanks!

[a male human]

Oh! Well, I'm glad I responded!

[redblueyellow]

Question on Fed Civ Pro - Expert Witnesses:

Ordinarily, opinions/reports (in anticipation of litigation) held by an expert witness of one party is "discoverable only through interrogatories." Once the expert witness is designated a trial witness, then the expert can be called to a deposition and his opinions/reports are discoverable (even over the objection of work product privilege).

The question hinged on the fact that the expert witness was "just" an expert witness and not designated as a trial witness, which made his opinion/report unavailable to be discovered. Is this correct law? I thought he would have to likely disclose the report if sent an interrogatory, which would ask him about his opinions or findings in the report?

On an MBE question, are we supposed to be told whether or not the expert witness is a trial witness?

[Pleasye]

Question on Fed Civ Pro - Expert Witnesses:

Ordinarily, opinions/reports (in anticipation of litigation) held by an expert witness of one party is "discoverable only through interrogatories." Once the expert witness is designated a trial witness, then the expert can be called to a deposition and his opinions/reports are discoverable (even over the objection of work product privilege).

The question hinged on the fact that the expert witness was "just" an expert witness and not designated as a trial witness, which made his opinion/report unavailable to be discovered. Is this correct law? I thought he would have to likely disclose the report if sent an interrogatory, which would ask him about his opinions or findings in the report?

On an MBE question, are we supposed to be told whether or not the expert witness is a trial witness?

26(b)(4)(D) says a party cannot discover, through depositions or interrogatories, facts known by or opinions of a non-testifying expert. Sorry if I'm misunderstanding your question, it's late and I'm delusional.

The MBE question should say whether or not the attorney plans to use the witness at trial since the rules differ depending on that fact.

[robinhoodOO]

For PR, I understand the distinctions between the ABA Model Rules and CA, but how does the Model Code come into play? Address it? Don't address it? How is it different? Any light shed on this would be appreciated.

On an essay, it'll usually say "What ethical violations, if any, did Attorney commit under the ABA? CA? Discuss both." Or something to that effect.

How you tackle it beyond that is entirely up to you. Personally, I start with the Duty implicated/violated, and then give the rule statement. If the rule is mostly similar, the rule statement sets forth: "The CA and ABA rules of professional conduct set forth..." If they are different enough to warrant conversation (i.e. sexual conduct w/clients), I start with one: "Under the CA rules of PC..." Analyze, and then conclude. Then do ABA. Obviously using proper headings to get the point across.

Read my post again Gotta read the facts carefully my man!

I thought I was giving you the benefit of the doubt by assuming you meant Model Rules as opposed to Model Code--haha. As in, you understand the distinctions between ABA and CA, but didn't understand how to convey the distinctions when in issue. So, I definitely knew what you said, but I just assumed you meant to say Rules.

If you're wondering why I assumed this, it might have something to do with the fact that the Model Code of Professional Conduct was replaced by the ABA in 1983 with the Model Rules of PR. In fact, New York was the last state to finally do away with them and that was in 2008. It will almost assuredly never be tested...In fact, I'd be stunned and astonished if it was ever mentioned...Ever. They're antiquated and in effect no where that I'm aware of...And, if the CBX says to be aware of them, you can assume this information is just outdated. It would simply not make sense...

So, did you mean Model Code of Judicial Conduct? Because those are just the canons related to judges/judiciary, and it's easy to see how that could come into play (but it's far less likely and, in fact, I'm not sure they test it). Or did you actually mean the Model Code of PR?

[robinhoodOO]

Question on Fed Civ Pro - Expert Witnesses:

Ordinarily, opinions/reports (in anticipation of litigation) held by an expert witness of one party is "discoverable only through interrogatories." Once the expert witness is designated a trial witness, then the expert can be called to a deposition and his opinions/reports are discoverable (even over the objection of work product privilege).

The question hinged on the fact that the expert witness was "just" an expert witness and not designated as a trial witness, which made his opinion/report unavailable to be discovered. Is this correct law? I thought he would have to likely disclose the report if sent an interrogatory, which would ask him about his opinions or findings in the report?

On an MBE question, are we supposed to be told whether or not the expert witness is a trial witness?

26(b)(4)(D) says a party cannot discover, through depositions or interrogatories, facts known by or opinions of a non-testifying expert. Sorry if I'm misunderstanding your question, it's late and I'm delusional.

The MBE question should say whether or not the attorney plans to use the witness at trial since the rules differ depending on that fact.

Just want to agree with your answer: No mandatory disclosure or discovery of a non-testifying expert. I believe there's an exception similar to the work-product exception, such that when there is an undue burden on acquiring the type of information such an expert might have you can still discover it.

Example: He's 1 of 2 expert's in the field and the other expert lives in Brazil and is unreachable.

[BuenAbogado]

Question on Fed Civ Pro - Expert Witnesses:

Ordinarily, opinions/reports (in anticipation of litigation) held by an expert witness of one party is "discoverable only through interrogatories." Once the expert witness is designated a trial witness, then the expert can be called to a deposition and his opinions/reports are discoverable (even over the objection of work product privilege).

The question hinged on the fact that the expert witness was "just" an expert witness and not designated as a trial witness, which made his opinion/report unavailable to be discovered. Is this correct law? I thought he would have to likely disclose the report if sent an interrogatory, which would ask him about his opinions or findings in the report?

On an MBE question, are we supposed to be told whether or not the expert witness is a trial witness?

26(b)(4)(D) says a party cannot discover, through depositions or interrogatories, facts known by or opinions of a non-testifying expert. Sorry if I'm misunderstanding your question, it's late and I'm delusional.

The MBE question should say whether or not the attorney plans to use the witness at trial since the rules differ depending on that fact.

Just want to agree with your answer: No mandatory disclosure or discovery of a non-testifying expert. I believe there's an exception similar to the work-product exception, such that when there is an undue burden on acquiring the type of information such an expert might have you can still discover it.

Example: He's 1 of 2 expert's in the field and the other expert lives in Brazil and is unreachable.

I wanna go to Brazil

[robinhoodOO]

Question on Fed Civ Pro - Expert Witnesses:

Ordinarily, opinions/reports (in anticipation of litigation) held by an expert witness of one party is "discoverable only through interrogatories." Once the expert witness is designated a trial witness, then the expert can be called to a deposition and his opinions/reports are discoverable (even over the objection of work product privilege).

The question hinged on the fact that the expert witness was "just" an expert witness and not designated as a trial witness, which made his opinion/report unavailable to be discovered. Is this correct law? I thought he would have to likely disclose the report if sent an interrogatory, which would ask him about his opinions or findings in the report?

On an MBE question, are we supposed to be told whether or not the expert witness is a trial witness?

26(b)(4)(D) says a party cannot discover, through depositions or interrogatories, facts known by or opinions of a non-testifying expert. Sorry if I'm misunderstanding your question, it's late and I'm delusional.

The MBE question should say whether or not the attorney plans to use the witness at trial since the rules differ depending on that fact.

Just want to agree with your answer: No mandatory disclosure or discovery of a non-testifying expert. I believe there's an exception similar to the work-product exception, such that when there is an undue burden on acquiring the type of information such an expert might have you can still discover it.

Example: He's 1 of 2 expert's in the field and the other expert lives in Brazil and is unreachable.

I wanna go to Brazil

Can we pass the CBX first

[redblueyellow]

Question on Fed Civ Pro - Expert Witnesses:

Ordinarily, opinions/reports (in anticipation of litigation) held by an expert witness of one party is "discoverable only through interrogatories." Once the expert witness is designated a trial witness, then the expert can be called to a deposition and his opinions/reports are discoverable (even over the objection of work product privilege).

The question hinged on the fact that the expert witness was "just" an expert witness and not designated as a trial witness, which made his opinion/report unavailable to be discovered. Is this correct law? I thought he would have to likely disclose the report if sent an interrogatory, which would ask him about his opinions or findings in the report?

On an MBE question, are we supposed to be told whether or not the expert witness is a trial witness?

26(b)(4)(D) says a party cannot discover, through depositions or interrogatories, facts known by or opinions of a non-testifying expert. Sorry if I'm misunderstanding your question, it's late and I'm delusional.

The MBE question should say whether or not the attorney plans to use the witness at trial since the rules differ depending on that fact.

Perfect, thanks! My outline/flash cards glossed over that point, and ain't nobody got time to look over the FRCP.

[crumpetsandtea]

I am having a HELL of a time trying to remember the CA rules for prof resp and civ pro. Anyone care to share tips on the best way to memorize?

[sopranorleone]

I am having a HELL of a time trying to remember the CA rules for prof resp and civ pro. Anyone care to share tips on the best way to memorize?

Same here. I made my own flash cards, and had a friend review them with me. Talking out the answer, even if it's roundabout because I have no idea what I'm doing, is helpful

[BuenAbogado]

I am having a HELL of a time trying to remember the CA rules for prof resp and civ pro. Anyone care to share tips on the best way to memorize?

They've never tested CA Civ Pro, so just don't memorize it at this point.

[crumpetsandtea]

I'm very tempted to just not study it, but with my luck this'll be the year they put it on the test, lol.
How did you make flashcards? Quizlet?

[paulshortys10]

I'm very tempted to just not study it, but with my luck this'll be the year they put it on the test, lol.
How did you make flashcards? Quizlet?

make sure to let us see those flashcards if you make them . I need something to do while i'm at a baseball game this sat.

2 quick/lazy CA bar questions. 1) how long is the break between the AM and PM session? 2) Can leave the building that we are in?

[redblueyellow]

Fed Civ Pro Question:

Scenario 1:

Employee posts negative comments on flyers about his employer around employer's building. Employer loses important contract as a result. Employer sues EE in state court for defamation. EE moves to remove to fed district court. Is removal proper?

Relevant answer choices:
A. Yes, because the EE's defense is based on First Amendment, so the fed dist court has fed question JX.
B. No, because the EE's First Amendment defense is insufficient to invoke fed question JX.

Answer: B.

Scenario 2:

EE speaks with fellow employees of ER regarding poor working conditions. EE wants to start a union, per NLRA, a federal statute. ER sues EE in state court for defamation. EE wants to remove to fed dist court. Is removal proper?

Relevant ans choices:
A. Yes, because there is a substantial question of federal law.
B. No, because a defense based on a fed statute is insufficient grounds for removal.

Answer: A.

Why is the EE's defense on a fed statute in Scenario 2 sufficient for removal, when EE's defense on the constitution is not sufficient in scenario 1? Both involve questions of fed law, and both cases could have likely been brought in fed dist court in the first place (scenario 1 could have been to silence speech, and scenario 2 for the NLRA issue). Both are suits for defamation in state court. Why different rulings?

[sopranorleone]

I'm very tempted to just not study it, but with my luck this'll be the year they put it on the test, lol.
How did you make flashcards? Quizlet?

I hand-wrote them on blank index cards. I memorize shit (and I consider all this to be pure shit) best when I write it down

[sopranorleone]

I'm very tempted to just not study it, but with my luck this'll be the year they put it on the test, lol.
How did you make flashcards? Quizlet?

make sure to let us see those flashcards if you make them . I need something to do while i'm at a baseball game this sat.

2 quick/lazy CA bar questions. 1) how long is the break between the AM and PM session? 2) Can leave the building that we are in?

No idea if we can leave the building, but the break is from 12-2. I think we have to be in our seats by 1:45, but don't quote me on that

[robinhoodOO]

I'm very tempted to just not study it, but with my luck this'll be the year they put it on the test, lol.
How did you make flashcards? Quizlet?

make sure to let us see those flashcards if you make them . I need something to do while i'm at a baseball game this sat.

2 quick/lazy CA bar questions. 1) how long is the break between the AM and PM session? 2) Can leave the building that we are in?

No idea if we can leave the building, but the break is from 12-2. I think we have to be in our seats by 1:45, but don't quote me on that

Yes, you can leave the building, but I believe you leave your laptop during break.

[Charger]

I'm very tempted to just not study it, but with my luck this'll be the year they put it on the test, lol.
How did you make flashcards? Quizlet?

make sure to let us see those flashcards if you make them . I need something to do while i'm at a baseball game this sat.

2 quick/lazy CA bar questions. 1) how long is the break between the AM and PM session? 2) Can leave the building that we are in?

No idea if we can leave the building, but the break is from 12-2. I think we have to be in our seats by 1:45, but don't quote me on that

Yes, you can leave the building, but I believe you leave your laptop during break.

Serious? Don't they also say to make sure your computer is charged in case there aren't enough outlets for everyone? On the hopefully small chance that there aren't enough outlets, and we can't take our laptops outside to charge during the break, how the hell is anyone's computer supposed to last till the end of the day?

[robinhoodOO]

I'm very tempted to just not study it, but with my luck this'll be the year they put it on the test, lol.
How did you make flashcards? Quizlet?

make sure to let us see those flashcards if you make them . I need something to do while i'm at a baseball game this sat.

2 quick/lazy CA bar questions. 1) how long is the break between the AM and PM session? 2) Can leave the building that we are in?

No idea if we can leave the building, but the break is from 12-2. I think we have to be in our seats by 1:45, but don't quote me on that

Yes, you can leave the building, but I believe you leave your laptop during break.

Serious? Don't they also say to make sure your computer is charged in case there aren't enough outlets for everyone? On the hopefully small chance that there aren't enough outlets, and we can't take our laptops outside to charge during the break, how the hell is anyone's computer supposed to last till the end of the day?

I spoke to an associate who passed in February and took it in Oakland. He said there were sufficient outlets; however, some of them weren't working and that you're responsible for bringing a charging cable and sufficient battery.

[acronyx]

Fed Civ Pro Question:

Scenario 1:

Employee posts negative comments on flyers about his employer around employer's building. Employer loses important contract as a result. Employer sues EE in state court for defamation. EE moves to remove to fed district court. Is removal proper?

Relevant answer choices:
A. Yes, because the EE's defense is based on First Amendment, so the fed dist court has fed question JX.
B. No, because the EE's First Amendment defense is insufficient to invoke fed question JX.

Answer: B.

Scenario 2:

EE speaks with fellow employees of ER regarding poor working conditions. EE wants to start a union, per NLRA, a federal statute. ER sues EE in state court for defamation. EE wants to remove to fed dist court. Is removal proper?

Relevant ans choices:
A. Yes, because there is a substantial question of federal law.
B. No, because a defense based on a fed statute is insufficient grounds for removal.

Answer: A.

Why is the EE's defense on a fed statute in Scenario 2 sufficient for removal, when EE's defense on the constitution is not sufficient in scenario 1? Both involve questions of fed law, and both cases could have likely been brought in fed dist court in the first place (scenario 1 could have been to silence speech, and scenario 2 for the NLRA issue). Both are suits for defamation in state court. Why different rulings?

My guess is the second scenario isn't really a defense under a federal statute here as the initial conflict is caused by EE trying to invoke a right granted by a federal statute, thus leading to this distinction. The wording is awkward though.

[paulshortys10]

I'm very tempted to just not study it, but with my luck this'll be the year they put it on the test, lol.
How did you make flashcards? Quizlet?

make sure to let us see those flashcards if you make them . I need something to do while i'm at a baseball game this sat.

2 quick/lazy CA bar questions. 1) how long is the break between the AM and PM session? 2) Can leave the building that we are in?

No idea if we can leave the building, but the break is from 12-2. I think we have to be in our seats by 1:45, but don't quote me on that

Yes, you can leave the building, but I believe you leave your laptop during break.

Serious? Don't they also say to make sure your computer is charged in case there aren't enough outlets for everyone? On the hopefully small chance that there aren't enough outlets, and we can't take our laptops outside to charge during the break, how the hell is anyone's computer supposed to last till the end of the day?

I spoke to an associate who passed in February and took it in Oakland. He said there were sufficient outlets; however, some of them weren't working and that you're responsible for bringing a charging cable and sufficient battery.

by charging cable do you mean my own extension cord or something?

[robinhoodOO]

I'm very tempted to just not study it, but with my luck this'll be the year they put it on the test, lol.
How did you make flashcards? Quizlet?

make sure to let us see those flashcards if you make them . I need something to do while i'm at a baseball game this sat.

2 quick/lazy CA bar questions. 1) how long is the break between the AM and PM session? 2) Can leave the building that we are in?

No idea if we can leave the building, but the break is from 12-2. I think we have to be in our seats by 1:45, but don't quote me on that

Yes, you can leave the building, but I believe you leave your laptop during break.

Serious? Don't they also say to make sure your computer is charged in case there aren't enough outlets for everyone? On the hopefully small chance that there aren't enough outlets, and we can't take our laptops outside to charge during the break, how the hell is anyone's computer supposed to last till the end of the day?

I spoke to an associate who passed in February and took it in Oakland. He said there were sufficient outlets; however, some of them weren't working and that you're responsible for bringing a charging cable and sufficient battery.

by charging cable do you mean my own extension cord or something?

Just your standard cord that you already have...

[Charger]

I'm very tempted to just not study it, but with my luck this'll be the year they put it on the test, lol.
How did you make flashcards? Quizlet?

make sure to let us see those flashcards if you make them . I need something to do while i'm at a baseball game this sat.

2 quick/lazy CA bar questions. 1) how long is the break between the AM and PM session? 2) Can leave the building that we are in?

No idea if we can leave the building, but the break is from 12-2. I think we have to be in our seats by 1:45, but don't quote me on that

Yes, you can leave the building, but I believe you leave your laptop during break.

Serious? Don't they also say to make sure your computer is charged in case there aren't enough outlets for everyone? On the hopefully small chance that there aren't enough outlets, and we can't take our laptops outside to charge during the break, how the hell is anyone's computer supposed to last till the end of the day?

I spoke to an associate who passed in February and took it in Oakland. He said there were sufficient outlets; however, some of them weren't working and that you're responsible for bringing a charging cable and sufficient battery.

Yeah, that's my point though. If I have a charging cable but the outlet doesn't work, how does that work at the end of the day? My battery, even when new, could not have lasted from 8:20 am to 5 pm without being charged. I think it's fucking bullshit that they make us pay $125 or whatever the laptop fee is and there's not even a guarantee of a working outlet. And then, on top of that, we can't take our laptops out to charge on our own, in case some unlucky soul doesn't get a working outlet. This whole thing is a fucking racket.

[robinhoodOO]

I'm very tempted to just not study it, but with my luck this'll be the year they put it on the test, lol.
How did you make flashcards? Quizlet?

make sure to let us see those flashcards if you make them . I need something to do while i'm at a baseball game this sat.

2 quick/lazy CA bar questions. 1) how long is the break between the AM and PM session? 2) Can leave the building that we are in?

No idea if we can leave the building, but the break is from 12-2. I think we have to be in our seats by 1:45, but don't quote me on that

Yes, you can leave the building, but I believe you leave your laptop during break.

Serious? Don't they also say to make sure your computer is charged in case there aren't enough outlets for everyone? On the hopefully small chance that there aren't enough outlets, and we can't take our laptops outside to charge during the break, how the hell is anyone's computer supposed to last till the end of the day?

I spoke to an associate who passed in February and took it in Oakland. He said there were sufficient outlets; however, some of them weren't working and that you're responsible for bringing a charging cable and sufficient battery.

Yeah, that's my point though. If I have a charging cable but the outlet doesn't work, how does that work at the end of the day? My battery, even when new, could not have lasted from 8:20 am to 5 pm without being charged. I think it's fucking bullshit that they make us pay $125 or whatever the laptop fee is and there's not even a guarantee of a working outlet. And then, on top of that, we can't take our laptops out to charge on our own, in case some unlucky soul doesn't get a working outlet. This whole thing is a fucking racket.

Yes...Let the hate flow through you...

No, but seriously: I know what your point is. The Bar probably does too...They just don't give a fuck. Don't shoot the messenger--haha.