New York Bar (Albany) Forum

[Roclandsfinest23]

Also, did anyone add a discussion portion to the 2nd MPT?

I didn't. Didn't see where the instructions said to

[yankeeman86]

Also, did anyone add a discussion portion to the 2nd MPT?

No, i think the discussion portion is for the Court to do.

Just facts/law.

[yankeeman86]

Also, did anyone add a discussion portion to the 2nd MPT?

I didn't. Didn't see where the instructions said to

my last few conclusions of law did not make much sense. i think this mpt was really about following instructions.

[mikefichera]

corps was a mess, any idea what was happening?

Derivatives suit
Hold share-demand letter- 90 days unless futile - director denial no good- no court investigation - breach of their fiduciary duty and not protected under BJR.

Anything else?

shareholder entitled to inspect board minutes/accounting records, i think 5 day notice?

Yes that too. 5 day notice.

has to be for a valid purpose, sh's purpose was to sue the corporation, which i don't believe is a valid purpose.

[yankeeman86]

Anyone remember if 2nd question asked you to assume that the 2nd marriage was valid or did they ask you to assume the first was valid?

2nd question asked you to assume common law marriage was valid.

for 1st question, i effed that up and said the valid common law marriage in state a would not be recognized in B.

[Jmazz88]

Completely bombed the Trusts and Corporation questions. Blanked on both. Made up a bunch of stuff. Threw some intent and fiduciary duty stuff in to see if it would stick. Hoping for a miracle.

Family Law, Contracts, and Agency I think were fine, and I at least did average.

For property, I had trouble figuring out what all of the issues were...hope I did enough to at least be average.

When all is said and done, a good MPT and below average to average MEE's is okay, I guess. Depends on tomorrow, of course...

[happyhour1122]

Also, did anyone add a discussion portion to the 2nd MPT?

Omg. I did... added last minute...

[yankeeman86]

corps was a mess, any idea what was happening?

Derivatives suit
Hold share-demand letter- 90 days unless futile - director denial no good- no court investigation - breach of their fiduciary duty and not protected under BJR.

Anything else?

shareholder entitled to inspect board minutes/accounting records, i think 5 day notice?

Yes that too. 5 day notice.

has to be for a valid purpose, sh's purpose was to sue the corporation, which i don't believe is a valid purpose.

for this i said, dismissal was proper because the SH was actually suing the board directly. im not sure if derivative claim is the proper method. usually when a shareholder wants to assert the rights of corp when corp doesnt. i effed this one up.

[yankeeman86]

Completely bombed the Trusts and Corporation questions. Blanked on both. Made up a bunch of stuff. Threw some intent and fiduciary duty stuff in to see if it would stick. Hoping for a miracle.

Family Law, Contracts, and Agency I think were fine, and I at least did average.

For property, I had trouble figuring out what all of the issues were...hope I did enough to at least be average.

When all is said and done, a good MPT and below average to average MEE's is okay, I guess. Depends on tomorrow, of course...

for prop, it was wild. most were landlord/tenant issues - was it reasonable for the landlord to reject assignment to lawyer? i argued both yes and no lol. said lawyers are annoyances! duty to mitigate was satisfied, tenant still needed to perform despite email, contract damages - k price - cover.

[mikefichera]

corps was a mess, any idea what was happening?

Derivatives suit
Hold share-demand letter- 90 days unless futile - director denial no good- no court investigation - breach of their fiduciary duty and not protected under BJR.

Anything else?

shareholder entitled to inspect board minutes/accounting records, i think 5 day notice?

Yes that too. 5 day notice.

has to be for a valid purpose, sh's purpose was to sue the corporation, which i don't believe is a valid purpose.

for this i said, dismissal was proper because the SH was actually suing the board directly. im not sure if derivative claim is the proper method. usually when a shareholder wants to assert the rights of corp when corp doesnt. i effed this one up.

what i'm saying is, the SH can only inspect the books for a proper purpose, the reason the SH wanted to inspect the books was solely to sue corporation, and SH is not allowed to inspect books for reasons unrelated to SHs rights. typically a SH can inspect books for purposes of getting addresses of other shareholders for voting purposes or evaluating the value of his shares for purposes of selling.

[happyhour1122]

corps was a mess, any idea what was happening?

Derivatives suit
Hold share-demand letter- 90 days unless futile - director denial no good- no court investigation - breach of their fiduciary duty and not protected under BJR.

Anything else?

ㅏ
shareholder entitled to inspect board minutes/accounting records, i think 5 day notice?

Yes that too. 5 day notice.

has to be for a valid purpose, sh's purpose was to sue the corporation, which i don't believe is a valid purpose.

for this i said, dismissal was proper because the SH was actually suing the board directly. im not sure if derivative claim is the proper method. usually when a shareholder wants to assert the rights of corp when corp doesnt. i effed this one up.

Similar.
It wasn't for personal benefit so I said derivatives ok

[mikefichera]

Also, did anyone add a discussion portion to the 2nd MPT?

Omg. I did... added last minute...

I didn't, i'm pretty sure the instructions did not say you were supposed to.

[Roclandsfinest23]

Completely bombed the Trusts and Corporation questions. Blanked on both. Made up a bunch of stuff. Threw some intent and fiduciary duty stuff in to see if it would stick. Hoping for a miracle.

Family Law, Contracts, and Agency I think were fine, and I at least did average.

For property, I had trouble figuring out what all of the issues were...hope I did enough to at least be average.

When all is said and done, a good MPT and below average to average MEE's is okay, I guess. Depends on tomorrow, of course...

for prop, it was wild. most were landlord/tenant issues - was it reasonable for the landlord to reject assignment to lawyer? i argued both yes and no lol. said lawyers are annoyances! duty to mitigate was satisfied, tenant still needed to perform despite email, contract damages - k price - cover.

I said there was a valid surrender and acceptance of surrender

[Jmazz88]

Also, did anyone add a discussion portion to the 2nd MPT?

Omg. I did... added last minute...

I thought this was only for the court to do? Did it say it in the initial memo?

[happyhour1122]

corps was a mess, any idea what was happening?

Derivatives suit
Hold share-demand letter- 90 days unless futile - director denial no good- no court investigation - breach of their fiduciary duty and not protected under BJR.

Anything else?

shareholder entitled to inspect board minutes/accounting records, i think 5 day notice?

Yes that too. 5 day notice.

has to be for a valid purpose, sh's purpose was to sue the corporation, which i don't believe is a valid purpose.

for this i said, dismissal was proper because the SH was actually suing the board directly. im not sure if derivative claim is the proper method. usually when a shareholder wants to assert the rights of corp when corp doesnt. i effed this one up.

what i'm saying is, the SH can only inspect the books for a proper purpose, the reason the SH wanted to inspect the books was solely to sue corporation, and SH is not allowed to inspect books for reasons unrelated to SHs rights. typically a SH can inspect books for purposes of getting addresses of other shareholders for voting purposes or evaluating the value of his shares for purposes of selling.

Good argument.
I didn't see that. I just had SH entitled to request to access with 5 day demand with indication of its purpose. Never thought about the validity of the purpose.

[yankeeman86]

corps was a mess, any idea what was happening?

Derivatives suit
Hold share-demand letter- 90 days unless futile - director denial no good- no court investigation - breach of their fiduciary duty and not protected under BJR.

Anything else?

shareholder entitled to inspect board minutes/accounting records, i think 5 day notice?

Yes that too. 5 day notice.

has to be for a valid purpose, sh's purpose was to sue the corporation, which i don't believe is a valid purpose.

for this i said, dismissal was proper because the SH was actually suing the board directly. im not sure if derivative claim is the proper method. usually when a shareholder wants to assert the rights of corp when corp doesnt. i effed this one up.

what i'm saying is, the SH can only inspect the books for a proper purpose, the reason the SH wanted to inspect the books was solely to sue corporation, and SH is not allowed to inspect books for reasons unrelated to SHs rights. typically a SH can inspect books for purposes of getting addresses of other shareholders for voting purposes or evaluating the value of his shares for purposes of selling.

here is the rule - S/Hs have the right to inspect the corporate books and records for any proper purpose. i think checking the records and minutes to see if there was any illegality is valid/proper.

[Jmazz88]

Completely bombed the Trusts and Corporation questions. Blanked on both. Made up a bunch of stuff. Threw some intent and fiduciary duty stuff in to see if it would stick. Hoping for a miracle.

Family Law, Contracts, and Agency I think were fine, and I at least did average.

For property, I had trouble figuring out what all of the issues were...hope I did enough to at least be average.

When all is said and done, a good MPT and below average to average MEE's is okay, I guess. Depends on tomorrow, of course...

for prop, it was wild. most were landlord/tenant issues - was it reasonable for the landlord to reject assignment to lawyer? i argued both yes and no lol. said lawyers are annoyances! duty to mitigate was satisfied, tenant still needed to perform despite email, contract damages - k price - cover.

Yeah arguing the case for both the landlord and tenant was interesting. Basically used the same analysis but changed a couple of things and said that "tenant could argue" "landlord could argue" etc.

[yankeeman86]

Also, did anyone add a discussion portion to the 2nd MPT?

Omg. I did... added last minute...

I thought this was only for the court to do? Did it say it in the initial memo?

no discussion

[happyhour1122]

I also raised statute of frauds issue...
Was not sigmed by anyone and it was a 2 year lease....

[yankeeman86]

it was a validly executed contract, assignment provision was included.

[mikefichera]

I also raised statute of frauds issue...
Was not sigmed by anyone and it was a 2 year lease....

maybe, but typically wouldn't they mention the lease was oral or give some fact to indicate a question of validity? also wouldn't possession of the property take it out of SoF?

[Roclandsfinest23]

I also raised statute of frauds issue...
Was not sigmed by anyone and it was a 2 year lease....

I argued that as well

[happyhour1122]

Also, did anyone add a discussion portion to the 2nd MPT?

Omg. I did... added last minute...

I thought this was only for the court to do? Did it say it in the initial memo?

no discussion

But the instruction indicated explain to the court why 1)Noah should not be no longer appointed 2) why Ruth was entitled to the guardianship.

I used it in the dscussion section

[Jmazz88]

I also raised statute of frauds issue...
Was not sigmed by anyone and it was a 2 year lease....

maybe, but typically wouldn't they mention the lease was oral or give some fact to indicate a question of validity? also wouldn't possession of the property take it out of SoF?

This was my thinking. Oh well..

[mikefichera]

Also, did anyone add a discussion portion to the 2nd MPT?

Omg. I did... added last minute...

I thought this was only for the court to do? Did it say it in the initial memo?

no discussion

But the instruction indicated explain to the court why 1)Noah should not be no longer appointed 2) why Ruth was entitled to the guardianship.

I used it in the dscussion section

they did, but wanted you to include it in your proposed conclusions of law, if you look at one of the cases they gave you; it provided an example of how to do that.