NY July 2016 Thread Forum

[ellewoods123]

Don't overreact. The overwhelming consensus was that the MEE was ridiculous and that the first MPT was impossible to organize. Scale will likely be upward!

Omg I don't know u but I luv u bc this is me exactly I felt SO dumb that I couldn't organize it

[LionelHutzJD]

Don't overreact. The overwhelming consensus was that the MEE was ridiculous and that the first MPT was impossible to organize. Scale will likely be upward!

Omg I don't know u but I luv u bc this is me exactly I felt SO dumb that I couldn't organize it

I completely changed my organization on the first MPT halfway through.

[mvp99]

Scale will go up? How does that work?

Anyone else very intimidated by the second MPT and then realized they had done the work for you?

[MCFC]

You're all gonna pass. It's fine.

Don't overreact. The overwhelming consensus was that the MEE was ridiculous and that the first MPT was impossible to organize. Scale will likely be upward!

Oh lol, I just wrote about it in the order the info was presented. Devoted zero thought to organizing. Oops.

Scale will go up? How does that work?

Anyone else very intimidated by the second MPT and then realized they had done the work for you?

Haha I love the subject so I was pretty excited when I saw the name of the MPT on the cover. The second portion of it was pretty dumb though imo.

[ellewoods123]

Scale will go up? How does that work?

Anyone else very intimidated by the second MPT and then realized they had done the work for you?

yes and then I was pissed because I spent so much time trying to organize the first one

[SLS_AMG]

I realized it was evidence/crim pro, but didn't really address the crim pro stuff because I thought there was NO WAY a person could address 5 sub parts of a question on two MBE topics in 30 mins.

:-/

[Monochromatic Oeuvre]

Scale will go up? How does that work?

Anyone else very intimidated by the second MPT and then realized they had done the work for you?

The second MPT was just a matter of having enough time to list the fuckton of ways the client was right.

[Rahviveh]

I realized it was evidence/crim pro, but didn't really address the crim pro stuff because I thought there was NO WAY a person could address 5 sub parts of a question on two MBE topics in 30 mins.

:-/

Yeah I didn't either. I wouldn't worry bout it.

[Avian]

Oh, and for those wondering, the split was 5 MBE to 2 MEE. One of the MBE essays contained two topics.

I knew it, Evi/ Crim Pro right? Please tell me I didn't fk up.

Correct. Evidence/Crim Pro. Was weird.

I've heard some people who said they wrote it only as an evidence one. I put it stuff about both, because I didn't see why they asked the last two questions if it was just evidence. I may have missed something, but the only possible difference I saw between the last two was from a crim pro rule.

Ran out of time on the second MPT after going over 10 minutes on the first one. That's going to keep bugging me because it was so easy, just didn't have time..

[Rahviveh]

Oh, and for those wondering, the split was 5 MBE to 2 MEE. One of the MBE essays contained two topics.

I knew it, Evi/ Crim Pro right? Please tell me I didn't fk up.

Correct. Evidence/Crim Pro. Was weird.

I've heard some people who said they wrote it only as an evidence one. I put it stuff about both, because I didn't see why they asked the last two questions if it was just evidence. I may have missed something, but the only possible difference I saw between the last two was from a crim pro rule.

Ran out of time on the second MPT after going over 10 minutes on the first one. That's going to keep bugging me because it was so easy, just didn't have time..

What was the crim pro rule for the last question?

[whitecollar23]

Oh, and for those wondering, the split was 5 MBE to 2 MEE. One of the MBE essays contained two topics.

I knew it, Evi/ Crim Pro right? Please tell me I didn't fk up.

Correct. Evidence/Crim Pro. Was weird.

I've heard some people who said they wrote it only as an evidence one. I put it stuff about both, because I didn't see why they asked the last two questions if it was just evidence. I may have missed something, but the only possible difference I saw between the last two was from a crim pro rule.

Ran out of time on the second MPT after going over 10 minutes on the first one. That's going to keep bugging me because it was so easy, just didn't have time..

What was the crim pro rule for the last question?

I think it was testing on the relevance of the defendant having invoked his lawyer during their previous encounter. Some of the evidence questions were merely statement of party opponent, which is so straightforward that I figured it had to also be asking about crim pro.

[MEEkilledMe]

Damn. I would be surprised if I correctly stated the rule on half
of them.

[mvp99]

[anacharsis]

Oh, and for those wondering, the split was 5 MBE to 2 MEE. One of the MBE essays contained two topics.

I knew it, Evi/ Crim Pro right? Please tell me I didn't fk up.

Correct. Evidence/Crim Pro. Was weird.

I've heard some people who said they wrote it only as an evidence one. I put it stuff about both, because I didn't see why they asked the last two questions if it was just evidence. I may have missed something, but the only possible difference I saw between the last two was from a crim pro rule.

Ran out of time on the second MPT after going over 10 minutes on the first one. That's going to keep bugging me because it was so easy, just didn't have time..

What was the crim pro rule for the last question?

I did a full right to counsel/reinitiation analysis, plus hearsay.

I felt good about the Evidence one, but really bad about MEE overall.

[Br3v]

What do we need for partial credit?

[LionelHutzJD]

Without discussing the substance of it, regarding that kinda radical action the one party wanted to take with SecTranx. Are they allowed to do that?

No.

That was the only part of that ST essay I was really able to answer though.

[Monochromatic Oeuvre]

So on the MBE I just have to get *adds with finger in air*...214.

[NaeDeen]

I don't care what state you are in, the shit was brutal. There is no force of nature, dead or alive, that could counteract the crazy that was jam packed in EACH essay. Crazy didn't discriminate today. A friend told me that if I'm panicking it's because I've passed.........I HOPE FOR THE SAKE OF MY SANITY HE IS RIGHT.

[whitecollar23]

Oh, and for those wondering, the split was 5 MBE to 2 MEE. One of the MBE essays contained two topics.

I knew it, Evi/ Crim Pro right? Please tell me I didn't fk up.

Correct. Evidence/Crim Pro. Was weird.

I've heard some people who said they wrote it only as an evidence one. I put it stuff about both, because I didn't see why they asked the last two questions if it was just evidence. I may have missed something, but the only possible difference I saw between the last two was from a crim pro rule.

Ran out of time on the second MPT after going over 10 minutes on the first one. That's going to keep bugging me because it was so easy, just didn't have time..

What was the crim pro rule for the last question?

I think it was testing on the relevance of the defendant having invoked his lawyer during their previous encounter. Some of the evidence questions were merely statement of party opponent, which is so straightforward that I figured it had to also be asking about crim pro.

yea 14 day rule

Ah, I didn't write about that. Though, was that even relevant given that the defendant waived his miranda rights that time? He needs to wait 14 days? Eh, I didn't even write about the fact that he was in a different location which helps, too. Oh, well!

[NaeDeen]

So on the MBE I just have to get *adds with finger in air*...214.

I LITERALLY JUST LOL'D

[whitecollar23]

Without discussing the substance of it, regarding that kinda radical action the one party wanted to take with SecTranx. Are they allowed to do that?

No.

That was the only part of that ST essay I was really able to answer though.

We're not allowed to talk substance of MEE on here?

[Br3v]

A couple of times I said things like "there is a rule on this [ISSUE SPOT.] That rules requires [X]." Turns out in a few scenarios rule actually requires the opposite, [Y].

That's partial credit for issue spotting right?

[Br3v]

Studying

[Thebarmakesmesad]

I filled in my answer to MPT #2 in the space for MPT #1. I'm freaking out because I don't want to fail the bar because I entered my answers in the wrong order. They gave me MPT #2 as the top booklet and I didn't see it was labeled with a number. When I asked the proctor she said it was fine and a lot of people do this, but I don't know if that is reliable.

Did anyone else do this?

[whitecollar23]

Without discussing the substance of it, regarding that kinda radical action the one party wanted to take with SecTranx. Are they allowed to do that?

No.

That was the only part of that ST essay I was really able to answer though.

We're not allowed to talk substance of MEE on here?

People haven't been but I don't think any of the proctors told us not to?

Well, if anyone is wondering what each part of the UCC 9 question tested on AND I won't get banned for making this offer, feel free to PM me and I'll tell you at least the issue of each. Mods, if I can't, please let me know.