MBE - how'd you feel? Forum

[jaysnooginz]

So are you saying both of these are battery? One is chair pulling out I can't remember the other. In neither was there "harmful or offensive contact" so I thought all the claims likely to fail but at least IIED was possible.

I thought IIED for the non-chair one.

same.

doesnt NIED revolve around the zone of danger for the 3rd party? I thought battery was a better option. Remember reading the case as a 1L.

NIED is definitely zone of danger or weird stuff like lost bodies.

[spacecaps]

So are you saying both of these are battery? One is chair pulling out I can't remember the other. In neither was there "harmful or offensive contact" so I thought all the claims likely to fail but at least IIED was possible.

I thought IIED for the non-chair one.

same.

doesnt NIED revolve around the zone of danger for the 3rd party? I thought battery was a better option. Remember reading the case as a 1L.

i'm pretty sure the chair was battery (causing contact w the ground is harmful or offensive). i remember it from torts as well

[sharklet]

So are you saying both of these are battery? One is chair pulling out I can't remember the other. In neither was there "harmful or offensive contact" so I thought all the claims likely to fail but at least IIED was possible.

I thought IIED for the non-chair one.

same.

doesnt NIED revolve around the zone of danger for the 3rd party? I thought battery was a better option. Remember reading the case as a 1L.

Battery. Garrat v. Dailey - the case of the chair-pulling 5-year-old.
http://www.lawnix.com/cases/garratt-dailey.html

[Lobolaw1984]

So are you saying both of these are battery? One is chair pulling out I can't remember the other. In neither was there "harmful or offensive contact" so I thought all the claims likely to fail but at least IIED was possible.

I thought IIED for the non-chair one.

same.

doesnt NIED revolve around the zone of danger for the 3rd party? I thought battery was a better option. Remember reading the case as a 1L.

Battery. Garrat v. Dailey - the case of the chair-pulling 5-year-old.
http://www.lawnix.com/cases/garratt-dailey.html

Yes!

[Outis Onoma]

So are you saying both of these are battery? One is chair pulling out I can't remember the other. In neither was there "harmful or offensive contact" so I thought all the claims likely to fail but at least IIED was possible.

I thought IIED for the non-chair one.

same.

doesnt NIED revolve around the zone of danger for the 3rd party? I thought battery was a better option. Remember reading the case as a 1L.

Battery. Garrat v. Dailey - the case of the chair-pulling 5-year-old.
http://www.lawnix.com/cases/garratt-dailey.html

Wooooh! I got one question right, at least.

[Raiden]

Right now, I'd love to review my questions right now. I totally can't remember any of the MBE questions, don't know if that's a good thing.

[gmerger]

After taking NY/NJ I feel like the MBE is gonna be the death of me, and I knew it a month ago and tried to fix it but after taking the real thing I feel there was nothing I could do about it.

I knew from the start of the summer I was horrible at MC and strong on essays. Always have been, always will be.

Got a horrific barbri simulated MBE score, so after that I spent the entire rest of the summer hammering MBE law, doing tons of practice questions everyday from Barbri and Emmanual, towards the end I was able to get my score up to 65% for emmanual questions and I was in the 70% plus percent range for Barbri's questions including most of their MPQ sets 5 & 6. I also got a score in the 60's on the barbri refresher too. Again, not great scores in comparison but they at least put me in passing range for the MBE, which based on my essay writing ability I thought gave me a fair shot at passing.I In any even I just felt like I worked so hard at the MBE to bring my score up to where I had a fighting chance on test day, and I even had some confidence going into the exam, which was a far cray from the nervous breakdown I had when I was in the 18th percentile for the simulated MBE.

That all got shot to hell on Wednesday. I wish I could believe the people who say that I will pass because I put the work in and everyone freaks out etc., but I feel like that rings hollow for me. I mean maybe if I was getting 70-80% right all summer long like others I would feel less crazed by the MBE, but I feel like if even those who performed well all summer are freaking out, then I really have no shot at passing the bar based on my MBE.

This is especially crushing because I felt that for all but a few of the NY/NJ essays I was pretty spot on with the issues/rules they were testing, of course there were times when I was making stuff up and completely lost but that goes with the territory. Considering that I basically abandoned essay practice and studying NY specific law for the last 3 weeks I think I managed the state essays ok enough to pass. Looking at admin law the morning of the NY essay day helped to.

The essays for both states I thought were a lot fairer than what I was expecting, minus 2-3 from each state. The MBE was a blood bath. I think the good scores I was getting towards the end were more based on me learning how to answer Barbri MC then anything else. If I get backed a scaled score of 80 I wouldn't be surprised. Just feels crazy that I could have just wasted my entire summer. Any chance of a 50 point scale?

[Kiwi3891]

So are you saying both of these are battery? One is chair pulling out I can't remember the other. In neither was there "harmful or offensive contact" so I thought all the claims likely to fail but at least IIED was possible.

I thought IIED for the non-chair one.

same.

doesnt NIED revolve around the zone of danger for the 3rd party? I thought battery was a better option. Remember reading the case as a 1L.

Battery. Garrat v. Dailey - the case of the chair-pulling 5-year-old.
http://www.lawnix.com/cases/garratt-dailey.html

Wooooh! I got one question right, at least.

small wins at this point!

I'm sitting with a pint of Hagen Dazs ice-cream. It'll be all gone soon. **sigh**

[mvpforme]

2014 Bar Applicant here. I only read a few of these posts. No advice, but I can say I felt the way a lot of you are feeling -- that it was a totally different exam, that I completely bombed the second half of the MBE, etc. -- and a lot of my friends did too. I actually counted after the exam 20 or so questions that I knew I got wrong. Anyway, we all passed. Apparently handedly.

I can't tell you not to freak out, but just know that my friends and I were convinced we failed. And we did fine.

[Good Guy Gaud]

2014 Bar Applicant here. I only read a few of these posts. No advice, but I can say I felt the way a lot of you are feeling -- that it was a totally different exam, that I completely bombed the second half of the MBE, etc. -- and a lot of my friends did too. I actually counted after the exam 20 or so questions that I knew I got wrong. Anyway, we all passed. Apparently handedly.

I can't tell you not to freak out, but just know that my friends and I were convinced we failed. And we did fine.

Appreciate that

[old_soul]

I, for one, picked the initial amount as the amount she was guilty of embezzling, since she converted it to her own. I don't think the profit or anything happening after mattered. Then again, I had never seen a question like that so I am not 100% sure.

Yup, pretty sure it's the initial amount. 100k, I think, is what I picked.

[somuchbooty]

30500 right?

i don't even remember the question i just remember 30500 and picked that one lol

[UVAIce]

I will say this, as much as I think that it was mostly on par with what I was studying before the bar exam, far more of the questions really hid the relevant facts or when they didn't the answer choices were vague or differed by such a small amount that you couldn't luck easily guess the correct answer because of your general understanding of the law (e.g. that's obviously admission by part opponent or that's definitely an option contract that cannot be revoked). But I think to a point it's to be expected -I wasn't expecting them to say that A from state A sued B state B in federal district court alleging damages under $75,000 or A from state A sued B from state A. There were definitely some slam dunk questions, but they felt far and few between.

[History_Buff]

30500 right?

i don't even remember the question i just remember 30500 and picked that one lol

Same boat.

[brotherdarkness]

30500 right?

i don't even remember the question i just remember 30500 and picked that one lol

Same boat.

I did too. Strength in numbers.

[brotherdarkness]

2014 Bar Applicant here. I only read a few of these posts. No advice, but I can say I felt the way a lot of you are feeling -- that it was a totally different exam, that I completely bombed the second half of the MBE, etc. -- and a lot of my friends did too. I actually counted after the exam 20 or so questions that I knew I got wrong. Anyway, we all passed. Apparently handedly.

I can't tell you not to freak out, but just know that my friends and I were convinced we failed. And we did fine.

Appreciate that

[kyle010723]

30500 right?

i don't even remember the question i just remember 30500 and picked that one lol

Same boat.

Depends on if the settlement was foreseeable. That was my biggest issue with that. But we probably shouldn't go into details.

[LAW813FL]

.

[UVAIce]

30500 right?

i don't even remember the question i just remember 30500 and picked that one lol

Same boat.

Depends on if the settlement was foreseeable. That was my biggest issue with that. But we probably shouldn't go into details.

This sums up that entire exam. The facts were just so sparse in some of these questions that it was never close to obvious what the right answer was even when you knew all the rules. And in my opinion, when that happens you really aren't testing basic legal competency, you've created a reading comprehension test where any competent lawyer would have just asked a couple of follow up questions.

[PJP]

What about the late laundry motor shipment damage? Usual daily loss vs. that + missing out an unusually profitable dying job. I wrote down like 20 questions I remembered from the MBE.

[somuchbooty]

30500 right?

i don't even remember the question i just remember 30500 and picked that one lol

Same boat.

Depends on if the settlement was foreseeable. That was my biggest issue with that. But we probably shouldn't go into details.

This sums up that entire exam. The facts were just so sparse in some of these questions that it was never close to obvious what the right answer was even when you knew all the rules. And in my opinion, when that happens you really aren't testing basic legal competency, you've created a reading comprehension test where any competent lawyer would have just asked a couple of follow up questions.

Ah right, the settlement thing. I think there's not enough facts there... b/c I don't think it mentioned whether the settlement was reasonable. That might have helped my thinking.

[somuchbooty]

.

[kyle010723]

30500 right?

i don't even remember the question i just remember 30500 and picked that one lol

Same boat.

Depends on if the settlement was foreseeable. That was my biggest issue with that. But we probably shouldn't go into details.

This sums up that entire exam. The facts were just so sparse in some of these questions that it was never close to obvious what the right answer was even when you knew all the rules. And in my opinion, when that happens you really aren't testing basic legal competency, you've created a reading comprehension test where any competent lawyer would have just asked a couple of follow up questions.

Agreed. Expectation damage, sure. Consequential, sure. But was the settlement foreseeable? You can settle, or you can litigate all the way to the Supreme Court.

Similarly, if I'm a lawyer, I'd assert all assault, battery, iied, nied. I'm not going to pick and choose when all claims can be viable.

[PJP]

.

[spacecaps]

.