Themis Bar Review Hangout - July 2014 Exam Forum

[kapital98]

I don't really get why there's even an essay portion on the bar exam. (Doing CA, to be clear.) IMO, it should just be performance tests and the MBE. I understand the idea that a lawyer should have a general grasp of the law and should be able to correctly identify certain legal issues without looking anything up, but the MBE covers that base. And the ability to correctly and thoroughly analyze an issue once you've looked up the relevant law--probably the main responsibility of most lawyers--is covered by the PT. I just don't see how the essay portion fits in with legal practice, unless you plan to commit malpractice by writing briefs without doing research.

I lol'd at this

[puttycake]

So, I did a contract essay and apparently completely missed the point. There are no words for how much I suck at this.

[SilverE2]

I don't really get why there's even an essay portion on the bar exam. (Doing CA, to be clear.) IMO, it should just be performance tests and the MBE. I understand the idea that a lawyer should have a general grasp of the law and should be able to correctly identify certain legal issues without looking anything up, but the MBE covers that base. And the ability to correctly and thoroughly analyze an issue once you've looked up the relevant law--probably the main responsibility of most lawyers--is covered by the PT. I just don't see how the essay portion fits in with legal practice, unless you plan to commit malpractice by writing briefs without doing research.

This is because, frankly, the bar examiners don't give a shit about testing for workable skills. They need some kind of arbitrary line in the sand to act as a cut-off. It's a hazing standard that effectively dissuades complete idiots from joining the practice of law.

If they were serious about testing skills relevant to demonstrate competency in their state, they wouldn't even be joking around with this "multi-state" bullshit. You'd just be asked to write different state-procedure-specific documents and maybe take a state-jurisdictional-specific multiple choice test. But they don't do that. They don't do that because they have no interest in committing actual resources to increasing standards of competency. It's never been about that.

Well stated. Some of the efforts of state bars to shape the legal profession are just downright depressing.

Alright, insecurity requires that I check in: what percentage are you bros and sis's sitting at? I'm almost at 10%. Chugging along slowly and painfully. Figure that ~2% a day should put me in a good spot by the end of June.

10.1%. You need to step up your game. (SERIOUS: 12%). Getting "better" at studying though. Almost increasing my productivity at 150% what i was able to pull off first 2 weeks.

I'm at 19%. I'm just following the daily schedule guys I promise I'm not a horrendous bar exam gunner.

[dudnaito]

I'm at 19%. I'm just following the daily schedule guys I promise I'm not a horrendous bar exam gunner.

"He's trying. He's actually trying. What a nerd. Look at the nerd."

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=itPwqxPr7Kc

[kapital98]

I'm at 19%. I'm just following the daily schedule guys I promise I'm not a horrendous bar exam gunner.

"He's trying. He's actually trying. What a nerd. Look at the nerd."

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=itPwqxPr7Kc

Nice clip!

Nothing wrong with being a bar exam gunner. I honestly have no idea how part-time people do this. I would be freaking out if I could only complete 40% of their materials.

[SilverE2]

I'm at 19%. I'm just following the daily schedule guys I promise I'm not a horrendous bar exam gunner.

"He's trying. He's actually trying. What a nerd. Look at the nerd."

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=itPwqxPr7Kc

Haha if it's any consolation I've been going through the lessons and practice questions, but I've memorized exactly 0% of the rules for the essays. I don't know the rule statement for battery. I'm not kidding. I think it's something about like touching someone when they don't want it.

[dudnaito]

I'm at 19%. I'm just following the daily schedule guys I promise I'm not a horrendous bar exam gunner.

"He's trying. He's actually trying. What a nerd. Look at the nerd."

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=itPwqxPr7Kc

Haha if it's any consolation I've been going through the lessons and practice questions, but I've memorized exactly 0% of the rules for the essays. I don't know the rule statement for battery. I'm not kidding. I think it's something about like touching someone when they don't want it.

Haha, i know. That clip wouldn't be a joke if you actually did do almost 20% having mastered the material. My studying session is two-fold (AM/PM session) I have my "listen to lecture/take notes on handout" AM session, followed by flashcard/memorize/PQ) PM session, and i've only recently incorporated the PM session.

I just remembered that clip cause i'm currently listening to the Corporations lecture by Prof. Birdthistle and I can't stop thinking how badly he'd have been bullied in my shitty high school. I mean.. c'mon, Birdthistle, lol. And he's like... learned and shit, ya know?

[MinEMorris]

19%? That's awesome. Don't apologize. You're a self-control hero.

Man, the first conlaw graded model answer really threw me off. The model answers to the previous practice tests seemed selective, cursory, and conclusory. I started to figure that the shotgun approach was disfavored and that I should tailor my answer to generally cover the most relevant issues to the call of the question. So, for example, when I got to the graded essay, and I saw that the question was "does X violate ___'s constitutional rights?" as opposed to, e.g., "____ brings suit claiming that the action violates its constitutional rights. Will its claim succeed?" I figured that we should skip standing and other crap since one can have its constitutional rights violated without having standing or a justiciable claim. Wrong. And there were several points made in the model answer that I thought were frivolous to go into. I guess the lesson is to go back to my first instinct of spaghetti on the wall, but it's annoying and feels like a set back to unravel what I thought I had figured out by paying close attention to their model answers so far.

I really hope I pass this stupid exam.

[jigglypuffdreams]

I'm at 46%, but only because I started REALLY early (May 5th-ish) and working ahead gives me a false sense of security. I'm also not doing any flashcards/active review/filling in handouts (I just listen to the lectures and answer the questions, there's nothing in there that I didn't already read in the big outlines and I'm probably going to use big outlines/smaller outlines for memorization). I'll review and memorize later I guess, for now I'm just sticking to what Themis tells me to do and maybe working ahead some days.

[puttycake]

So, for example, when I got to the graded essay, and I saw that the question was "does X violate ___'s constitutional rights?" as opposed to, e.g., "____ brings suit claiming that the action violates its constitutional rights. Will its claim succeed?" I figured that we should skip standing and other crap since one can have its constitutional rights violated without having standing or a justiciable claim. Wrong. And there were several points made in the model answer that I thought were frivolous to go into. I guess the lesson is to go back to my first instinct of spaghetti on the wall, but it's annoying and feels like a set back to unravel what I thought I had figured out by paying close attention to their model answers so far.

I really hope I pass this stupid exam.

I hear ya. I SO hear ya. I did the same thing.

I'm at 33%. I started early (I used the Evidence lectures for my school Evidence exam) and have been slogging along. And I read outlines way ahead (and am a fast reader).

But I am truly bringing a level of suck to the essay that should get me shot.

[Apple Tree]

Could anyone please help me with a real property question?

In property essay #116 (the second one of the first set), a JT transferred her interest to a third party, but the JT retained life estate interest and only gave the 3rdP a vested remainder interest. The answer says this transfer is valid (assuming it satisfies the deed requirements), but I thought JT interest vanishes at death and therefore cannot be devised. So when the JT who gave away her interests died, wouldn't her interests automatically pass onto the surviving JT instead of going to the 3rdP? Is it because she did this in an inter vivos gift so in effect the JT relationship was severed when she executed the deed (again, assuming it's valid)? If the deed is immediately delivered to the 3rdP upon execution, does it mean it is instantly valid even though the 3rdP can't obtain the interest upon the JT dying? I thought the deed only becomes valid when the 3rdP's interest vests.

Not sure if my questions make sense... My head hurts from studying...

[themis513]

Anyone having technical problems doing their MBE mc questions sometimes? Like when you try to get to the next question it just comes up as blank and all you can see is the "ABCD column". Then there's nothing you can do but refresh the page which brings up the questions again, less the number of ones you have already completed and then messes up the answer choices for the previous ones that have now vanished, which decreases your score?!

[iLoveFruits&Veggies]

Well, I'm only at 13% and that just means I've covered 13%, not that I have memorized 13%, so hopefully that makes someone feel better out there! And I've never watched 21 Jump Street before (shocking, I know) but just watched the clip posted... thought it was kind of ironic that just today Jonas Hill is splattered all over the press for saying an anti-gay slur... just thought it was funny timing to post that video snippet when it involves the same topic he's facing in real life today

Oh, btw, I got two of the exact same Themis MBE practice questions in a row. Word for Word - Same Question! Thought that was kinda odd!

Ok, back to the videos! Weeeeeeee

[Tanicius]

I still haven't even gotten a response to my graded essay that I wrote on Friday. WTF.

[A shot in the dark]

WHY DOES SHERMAN CLARK SPEND SO MUCH TIME WITH HIS HEAD FACING AWAY FROM THE CAMERA?! WHAT IS GOING ON TO HIS RIGHT?! IS HE FALSELY IMPRISONED?!

[Lilly76]

WHY DOES SHERMAN CLARK SPEND SO MUCH TIME WITH HIS HEAD FACING AWAY FROM THE CAMERA?! WHAT IS GOING ON TO HIS RIGHT?! IS HE FALSELY IMPRISONED?!

I don't know why, but this made me laugh so hard.

[puttycake]

Could anyone please help me with a real property question?

In property essay #116 (the second one of the first set), a JT transferred her interest to a third party, but the JT retained life estate interest and only gave the 3rdP a vested remainder interest. The answer says this transfer is valid (assuming it satisfies the deed requirements), but I thought JT interest vanishes at death and therefore cannot be devised. So when the JT who gave away her interests died, wouldn't her interests automatically pass onto the surviving JT instead of going to the 3rdP? Is it because she did this in an inter vivos gift so in effect the JT relationship was severed when she executed the deed (again, assuming it's valid)? If the deed is immediately delivered to the 3rdP upon execution, does it mean it is instantly valid even though the 3rdP can't obtain the interest upon the JT dying? I thought the deed only becomes valid when the 3rdP's interest vests.

Not sure if my questions make sense... My head hurts from studying...

When a JT transfers an interest, the transfer severs the JT for that interest. So if there are just two JTs to start with, it destroys the entire JT. If there are more than two, the people not involved in the transfer will still have a JT, but the person who sold/gave/transferred hers away will have turned her interest into a Tenancy in Common.

So, say Andy, Barney, and Goober have a JT. They each own 1/3. Now Andy gives his interest to Aunt Bee. She owns 1/3. Barney and Goober still have a JT between them, each still owning 1/3, but Aunt Bee's interest is a Tenancy in Common with them.

Instead, if Andy were to try to leave his share to Opie in his will, or for Opie to inherit via intestacy, that wouldn't work. As soon as Andy died, his interest would be split between Barney and Goober (who would then each own 1/2).

Think of joint tenancies as really delicate and easy to break. Tenancy in Common, on the other hand, is sturdy and it's what things default to when JT or Tenancy by the Entirety fall apart.

[Apple Tree]

Could anyone please help me with a real property question?

In property essay #116 (the second one of the first set), a JT transferred her interest to a third party, but the JT retained life estate interest and only gave the 3rdP a vested remainder interest. The answer says this transfer is valid (assuming it satisfies the deed requirements), but I thought JT interest vanishes at death and therefore cannot be devised. So when the JT who gave away her interests died, wouldn't her interests automatically pass onto the surviving JT instead of going to the 3rdP? Is it because she did this in an inter vivos gift so in effect the JT relationship was severed when she executed the deed (again, assuming it's valid)? If the deed is immediately delivered to the 3rdP upon execution, does it mean it is instantly valid even though the 3rdP can't obtain the interest upon the JT dying? I thought the deed only becomes valid when the 3rdP's interest vests.

Not sure if my questions make sense... My head hurts from studying...

When a JT transfers an interest, the transfer severs the JT for that interest. So if there are just two JTs to start with, it destroys the entire JT. If there are more than two, the people not involved in the transfer will still have a JT, but the person who sold/gave/transferred hers away will have turned her interest into a Tenancy in Common.

So, say Andy, Barney, and Goober have a JT. They each own 1/3. Now Andy gives his interest to Aunt Bee. She owns 1/3. Barney and Goober still have a JT between them, each still owning 1/3, but Aunt Bee's interest is a Tenancy in Common with them.

Instead, if Andy were to try to leave his share to Opie in his will, or for Opie to inherit via intestacy, that wouldn't work. As soon as Andy died, his interest would be split between Barney and Goober (who would then each own 1/2).

Think of joint tenancies as really delicate and easy to break. Tenancy in Common, on the other hand, is sturdy and it's what things default to when JT or Tenancy by the Entirety fall apart.

I see, thank you! So a JT can't transfer her interest by will or through intestacy. Otherwise, she can transfer her interest however she wants (and therefore severs the JT relationship)?

[puttycake]

I see, thank you! So a JT can't transfer her interest by will or through intestacy. Otherwise, she can transfer her interest however she wants (and therefore severs the JT relationship)?

Exactly. Because the survivorship feature of the JT acts automatically and before anything else can happen, there's no interest left for anyone to inherit.

[Apple Tree]

where does one get ahold of the Kaplan MBE question bank?

Interested in this as well. Have to travel for a couple of days and can't do the Themis MBE because they are all online.

[Genuine4ps]

Checking in at a strong 5%.

[071816]

I'm at 15%. This feels like a really shitty RPG game!

[dudnaito]

I'm at 15%. This feels like a really shitty RPG game!

Funny you should mention that, i just bought a 3ds and fire emblem 30 minutes ago, first game i bought in like 5 years. I need something to do for 30 minutes or so when i'm taking a break.

Hopefully, that'll mean i'll feel like i'm playing 2 rpg's.

[j1987]

17%

[j1987]

17%

I meant to type "I am at" 17%. yikes…