BarBri Bar Review Hangout - July 2016 (UBE -NY) Forum

[jj252525]

how was everyone's timing?

how was everyone's timing?

I was fucking around and still finished way early. Really, I need to slow down.

Yeah I finished with 45 minutes left on each section. Really a sign that I should take it easy. Nothing good comes from rushing.

[mvp99]

I found this NCBE outline and I think I'll use it as a check list. http://www.ncbex.org/exams/mee/preparing/

[mvp99]

yall probably know this but percentiles are out

[fauxpsych]

121/200. 62/100 in the am and 59/100 in the pm. I felt slower in the pm, but i guess it its effects were negligible.

Had about an hour left after each session, so I clearly need to slow down. Worst subject was property (54%), but a crushed evidence, relatively speaking, at 79%.

[hellojd]

I'm playing catch-up here, and since property is likely my weakest subject have been trying to shore up my understanding.

Did anyone else find the property problem sets (particularly 2 and 3) ridiculously hard? The average Barbri scores listed are 50% for each, which I barely did better than. I'm really hoping the real MBE can't have property questions so difficult...

[jj252525]

So today's Tort set was kind of bullshit.

[sublime]

So today's Tort set was kind of bullshit.

I haven't done it but ppl say sets 5 and 6 in general are fucked up

[LionelHutzJD]

I think i'm gonna do the test review videos today and tomorrow and save all this Torts shit for this weekend. I'd rather review the test when it's still fresh.

First I have to catch up on this Corps lecture though, ugh.

[sublime]

I think i'm gonna do the test review videos today and tomorrow and save all this Torts shit for this weekend. I'd rather review the test when it's still fresh.

First I have to catch up on this Corps lecture though, ugh.

Yea, I'm kind of considering the same thing.

[jj252525]

So today's Tort set was kind of bullshit.

I haven't done it but ppl say sets 5 and 6 in general are fucked up

i'm infuriated.

[SLS_AMG]

Have you guys looked ahead at the amount of material Barbri is programming per day starting like next Monday? It's NUTS.

[WahooLaw24]

So today's Tort set was kind of bullshit.

I haven't done it but ppl say sets 5 and 6 in general are fucked up

I noticed a huge jump in difficulty in set 5 (I'm a few days ahead obviously). Lots of "this will likely be the outcome" and even "the Supreme Court never decided this case but would probably come out this way," which was frustrating. More super obscure topics too, which is frustrating, but just gotta treat it as a learning experience.

[Br3v]

So today's Tort set was kind of bullshit.

I haven't done it but ppl say sets 5 and 6 in general are fucked up

i'm infuriated.

Yeah like even the torts questions I knew the answer to, I remember asking "why did they word the answer like that though?"

[ArtistOfManliness]

So today's Tort set was kind of bullshit.

I haven't done it but ppl say sets 5 and 6 in general are fucked up

I noticed a huge jump in difficulty in set 5 (I'm a few days ahead obviously). Lots of "this will likely be the outcome" and even "the Supreme Court never decided this case but would probably come out this way," which was frustrating. More super obscure topics too, which is frustrating, but just gotta treat it as a learning experience.

I fucking hate those.

I thought that if the Supreme Court has never decided the case, and it's only "likely" to come out a certain way, then it won't be on the bar exam. That's what you fucking told me at the beginning of this shitshow.

[yodamiked]

Checking in. 152/200. All the subjects I did well on were the ones I've traditionally been bombing on, so not sure what that's about.

Anyone else see the NY Bar Examination Security Policy Email from Barbri today? Please tell me I'm misreading it and that you can leave to go the bathroom and still re-enter the exam room. The "After you leave the exam room, you may not re-enter until the next testing session" line is worrying me, though I can't imagine that's applicable to using the bathroom. If there's one thing I learned from the Simulated MBE, it's that I both have time, and need to, take lots of breaks just to clear my head if I'm to survive 200 questions.

[KRose04]

Checking in. 152/200. All the subjects I did well on were the ones I've traditionally been bombing on, so not sure what that's about.

Anyone else see the NY Bar Examination Security Policy Email from Barbri today? Please tell me I'm misreading it and that you can leave to go the bathroom and still re-enter the exam room. The "After you leave the exam room, you may not re-enter until the next testing session" line is worrying me, though I can't imagine that's applicable to using the bathroom. If there's one thing I learned from the Simulated MBE, it's that I both have time, and need to, take lots of breaks just to clear my head if I'm to survive 200 questions.

They mean once you're done. To go to the bathroom you just have to ask the proctor

[sublime]

I also did shitty on subjects I was okay on and well on shit I didn't.

Like two subjects with at least 90% percentile, and two with sub 40.

[mvp99]

on today's torts set, I think some of the explanations are wrong at least in one aspect.

[+] Spoiler

construction/powder question, the explanation is using a subjective standard for foreseeable plaintiffs when it should be objective. Why does it matter in a negligence case whether the contractor knew if someone was a foreseeable plaintiff? Knowing of a foreseeable plaintiff is sufficient but the duty also extends to plaintiffs he should've guarded against, and simply concluding "no one will be in the house because the owner is out of town" is seems unreasonable. I think maybe the case really turns on causation (the type of harm the contractor should have guarded against was the type of harm that occurred). Anyway, I'm not satisfied with the explanation so if anyone could explain it better that would be great.

[KRose04]

before crim was my worst and torts was best. on the exam, they switched places -___-

[mvp99]

Checking in. 152/200. All the subjects I did well on were the ones I've traditionally been bombing on, so not sure what that's about.

Anyone else see the NY Bar Examination Security Policy Email from Barbri today? Please tell me I'm misreading it and that you can leave to go the bathroom and still re-enter the exam room. The "After you leave the exam room, you may not re-enter until the next testing session" line is worrying me, though I can't imagine that's applicable to using the bathroom. If there's one thing I learned from the Simulated MBE, it's that I both have time, and need to, take lots of breaks just to clear my head if I'm to survive 200 questions.

dang your percentile must be like 98

[yodamiked]

Checking in. 152/200. All the subjects I did well on were the ones I've traditionally been bombing on, so not sure what that's about.

Anyone else see the NY Bar Examination Security Policy Email from Barbri today? Please tell me I'm misreading it and that you can leave to go the bathroom and still re-enter the exam room. The "After you leave the exam room, you may not re-enter until the next testing session" line is worrying me, though I can't imagine that's applicable to using the bathroom. If there's one thing I learned from the Simulated MBE, it's that I both have time, and need to, take lots of breaks just to clear my head if I'm to survive 200 questions.

dang your percentile must be like 98

Yeah, like 95...I'd feel better if I didn't think I might have fluked out with Evidence and Property.

[Br3v]

on today's torts set, I think some of the explanations are wrong at least in one aspect.

[+] Spoiler

construction/powder question, the explanation is using a subjective standard for foreseeable plaintiffs when it should be objective. Why does it matter in a negligence case whether the contractor knew if someone was a foreseeable plaintiff? Knowing of a foreseeable plaintiff is sufficient but the duty also extends to plaintiffs he should've guarded against, and simply concluding "no one will be in the house because the owner is out of town" is seems unreasonable. I think maybe the case really turns on causation (the type of harm the contractor should have guarded against was the type of harm that occurred). Anyway, I'm not satisfied with the explanation so if anyone could explain it better that would be great.

I similarly thought that question was weak

[+] Spoiler

guy leaves highly dangerous powder on ground because he doesn't think anyone will come over until tomorrow? Seems pretty negligent.

[yodamiked]

Checking in. 152/200. All the subjects I did well on were the ones I've traditionally been bombing on, so not sure what that's about.

Anyone else see the NY Bar Examination Security Policy Email from Barbri today? Please tell me I'm misreading it and that you can leave to go the bathroom and still re-enter the exam room. The "After you leave the exam room, you may not re-enter until the next testing session" line is worrying me, though I can't imagine that's applicable to using the bathroom. If there's one thing I learned from the Simulated MBE, it's that I both have time, and need to, take lots of breaks just to clear my head if I'm to survive 200 questions.

They mean once you're done. To go to the bathroom you just have to ask the proctor

Ok cool, that's what I thought, but it just seemed poorly written and unclear.

[sublime]

Checking in. 152/200. All the subjects I did well on were the ones I've traditionally been bombing on, so not sure what that's about.

Anyone else see the NY Bar Examination Security Policy Email from Barbri today? Please tell me I'm misreading it and that you can leave to go the bathroom and still re-enter the exam room. The "After you leave the exam room, you may not re-enter until the next testing session" line is worrying me, though I can't imagine that's applicable to using the bathroom. If there's one thing I learned from the Simulated MBE, it's that I both have time, and need to, take lots of breaks just to clear my head if I'm to survive 200 questions.

dang your percentile must be like 98

Yeah, like 95...I'd feel better if I didn't think I might have fluked out with Evidence and Property.

I did really shitty on evid but feel like prop was a fluke for me too.

[WahooLaw24]

on today's torts set, I think some of the explanations are wrong at least in one aspect.

[+] Spoiler

construction/powder question, the explanation is using a subjective standard for foreseeable plaintiffs when it should be objective. Why does it matter in a negligence case whether the contractor knew if someone was a foreseeable plaintiff? Knowing of a foreseeable plaintiff is sufficient but the duty also extends to plaintiffs he should've guarded against, and simply concluding "no one will be in the house because the owner is out of town" is seems unreasonable. I think maybe the case really turns on causation (the type of harm the contractor should have guarded against was the type of harm that occurred). Anyway, I'm not satisfied with the explanation so if anyone could explain it better that would be great.

I similarly thought that question was weak

[+] Spoiler

guy leaves highly dangerous powder on ground because he doesn't think anyone will come over until tomorrow? Seems pretty negligent.

Was very confused by that one as well.