California Bar Exam (July 2014) thread Forum

[a male human]

Regardless of model answer length, on the real thing, assume you only have 1 hour for each.

I personally invested 15 seconds at the beginning to look at which subjects are covered. Then I intentionally ordered the way I answered them in this order:
Middle --> strongest (most confident subject) --> weakest

I thought if I'm going to bomb one anyway, I might as well save my mental endurance for the ones I can actually do.

[FutureInLaw]

Anyone mind helping me with the distinction between a designated public forum and a limited public forum? I'm a bit confused as to the distinction in definition and the distinction in scrutiny.

My current understanding (which totally may be wrong):

When designated public forums are open, regulations must be content-neutral, serve an important gov't purpose, and leave alternative avenues for speech open.

When limited public forums are open, regulations must be viewpoint-neutral and serve a legitimate gov't purpose.

In terms of definitions, then, a designated public forum cannot exclude certain broad subject areas of speech, while a limited public forum can. But if a limited public forum chooses to open itself to a certain subject area of speech, all viewpoints must be allowed.

NOTE: Barbri and Critical Pass have different scrutiny levels for limited public forums, which is adding to my confusion.

Thanks in advance.

[pkt63]

Anyone mind helping me with the distinction between a designated public forum and a limited public forum? I'm a bit confused as to the distinction in definition and the distinction in scrutiny.

My current understanding (which totally may be wrong):

When designated public forums are open, regulations must be content-neutral, serve an important gov't purpose, and leave alternative avenues for speech open.

When limited public forums are open, regulations must be viewpoint-neutral and serve a legitimate gov't purpose.

In terms of definitions, then, a designated public forum cannot exclude certain broad subject areas of speech, while a limited public forum can. But if a limited public forum chooses to open itself to a certain subject area of speech, all viewpoints must be allowed.

NOTE: Barbri and Critical Pass have different scrutiny levels for limited public forums, which is adding to my confusion.

Thanks in advance.

Looks right to me on the rule statements. A quick google search tells me that limited and designated forums are often confused and considered to overlap, so that really sucks that they are supposed to be the dividing line between two important approaches on the bar exam. Apparently the 8th Circuit said this just 8 years ago: "[O]ur Circuit's analysis of what constitutes a 'designated public forum,' like our sister Circuits', is far from lucid. Substantial confusion exists regarding what distinction, if any exists between a 'designated public forum' and a 'limited public forum.'" Bowman v. White, 444 F.3d 967, 975.

I assume when and if it comes up on the MBE it will be more obvious and if on the essay, you can just talk about both and say it might be designated in which case X or it might be limited in which case Y.

[jarofsoup]

Question about allocating time for the essays. BarBri taught us to be disciplined and allocate each essay equal time - one hour. Since each essay is worth the same amount, you cannot get extra points by spending extra time on one to make up for a lack of points on another. However, looking at their model answers, some are 2 pages long and some are 5 - so I'm starting to question their advice about allocating equal time. For past bar takers, what did you do?

I am sitting for the july bar. But I think if you finish with in 30-40 minutes assume you are missing something and try to dig for an issue. I am trying to write around 4 pages per answer.

[Kiwi917]

Reposting this from the Themis thread, probably should have posted here since it's a CA-specific question. Curious how Barbri or others explain this rule...

Wills question for the CA folks -

The Themis materials all give the following rule for one of the exceptions when an omitted child does not get the omitted child's share: "The testator had other children at the time the will was executed and left substantially all of his estate to the other parent of the omitted child."

On a practice essay where the later-born omitted child was an only child, and the mother received substantially all of the estate, the model answer said that the omitted child would still be entitled to an omitted child's share under the statute, because the decedent did not have "other children" at the time the will was executed (only the one child born a year later). Seems consistent with the rule above.

The model answers on the CA bar site both say the child does NOT get a share as an omitted child, because the other parent of the omitted child got substantially all of the estate. I know sometimes the published answers get things wrong, but this seems like a key piece since it affects the entire distribution, so I don't get why they would pick two answers that came to the wrong result.

The probate code phrases the exception as "The decedent had one or more children and devised or otherwise directed the disposition of substantially all the estate to the other parent of the omitted child."

The ambiguity here seems to be whether the "one or more children" have to be alive at the time the will was executed, or whether the later-born omitted child counts for purposes of this exception. I think the code means that at least one child has to be alive at the time the will was made, because otherwise you can't draw as strong an inference that leaving the entire estate to the other parent was intended as a way to provide for the children as well.

Can anyone shed light on this for me?

[ph14]

Reposting this from the Themis thread, probably should have posted here since it's a CA-specific question. Curious how Barbri or others explain this rule...

Wills question for the CA folks -

The Themis materials all give the following rule for one of the exceptions when an omitted child does not get the omitted child's share: "The testator had other children at the time the will was executed and left substantially all of his estate to the other parent of the omitted child."

On a practice essay where the later-born omitted child was an only child, and the mother received substantially all of the estate, the model answer said that the omitted child would still be entitled to an omitted child's share under the statute, because the decedent did not have "other children" at the time the will was executed (only the one child born a year later). Seems consistent with the rule above.

The model answers on the CA bar site both say the child does NOT get a share as an omitted child, because the other parent of the omitted child got substantially all of the estate. I know sometimes the published answers get things wrong, but this seems like a key piece since it affects the entire distribution, so I don't get why they would pick two answers that came to the wrong result.

The probate code phrases the exception as "The decedent had one or more children and devised or otherwise directed the disposition of substantially all the estate to the other parent of the omitted child."

The ambiguity here seems to be whether the "one or more children" have to be alive at the time the will was executed, or whether the later-born omitted child counts for purposes of this exception. I think the code means that at least one child has to be alive at the time the will was made, because otherwise you can't draw as strong an inference that leaving the entire estate to the other parent was intended as a way to provide for the children as well.

Can anyone shed light on this for me?

I'm pretty sure that your outcome and reasoning are correct and those model answers are just wrong. Let me check my notes.

Edit: Assuming that you're not omitting any material facts from the problem or answer, you are correct. Here's Barbri's statement of the rule: "Second exception: At the time of execution of the testamentary instrument, the decedent had one or more children and transferred by will or revocable inter vivos trust substantially all of his estate to the parent of the omitted child."

[Kiwi917]

Reposting this from the Themis thread, probably should have posted here since it's a CA-specific question. Curious how Barbri or others explain this rule...

Wills question for the CA folks -

The Themis materials all give the following rule for one of the exceptions when an omitted child does not get the omitted child's share: "The testator had other children at the time the will was executed and left substantially all of his estate to the other parent of the omitted child."

On a practice essay where the later-born omitted child was an only child, and the mother received substantially all of the estate, the model answer said that the omitted child would still be entitled to an omitted child's share under the statute, because the decedent did not have "other children" at the time the will was executed (only the one child born a year later). Seems consistent with the rule above.

The model answers on the CA bar site both say the child does NOT get a share as an omitted child, because the other parent of the omitted child got substantially all of the estate. I know sometimes the published answers get things wrong, but this seems like a key piece since it affects the entire distribution, so I don't get why they would pick two answers that came to the wrong result.

The probate code phrases the exception as "The decedent had one or more children and devised or otherwise directed the disposition of substantially all the estate to the other parent of the omitted child."

The ambiguity here seems to be whether the "one or more children" have to be alive at the time the will was executed, or whether the later-born omitted child counts for purposes of this exception. I think the code means that at least one child has to be alive at the time the will was made, because otherwise you can't draw as strong an inference that leaving the entire estate to the other parent was intended as a way to provide for the children as well.

Can anyone shed light on this for me?

I'm pretty sure that your outcome and reasoning are correct and those model answers are just wrong. Let me check my notes.

Edit: Assuming that you're not omitting any material facts from the problem or answer, you are correct. Here's Barbri's statement of the rule: "Second exception: At the time of execution of the testamentary instrument, the decedent had one or more children and transferred by will or revocable inter vivos trust substantially all of his estate to the parent of the omitted child."

Thanks! I don't think I missed anything from the problem or answer, but it was February 2007, if you want to take a look. It just seemed weird to me that they published two answers that both came to the wrong result in applying that exception.

[Carryon]

Reposting this from the Themis thread, probably should have posted here since it's a CA-specific question. Curious how Barbri or others explain this rule...

Wills question for the CA folks -

The Themis materials all give the following rule for one of the exceptions when an omitted child does not get the omitted child's share: "The testator had other children at the time the will was executed and left substantially all of his estate to the other parent of the omitted child."

On a practice essay where the later-born omitted child was an only child, and the mother received substantially all of the estate, the model answer said that the omitted child would still be entitled to an omitted child's share under the statute, because the decedent did not have "other children" at the time the will was executed (only the one child born a year later). Seems consistent with the rule above.

The model answers on the CA bar site both say the child does NOT get a share as an omitted child, because the other parent of the omitted child got substantially all of the estate. I know sometimes the published answers get things wrong, but this seems like a key piece since it affects the entire distribution, so I don't get why they would pick two answers that came to the wrong result.

The probate code phrases the exception as "The decedent had one or more children and devised or otherwise directed the disposition of substantially all the estate to the other parent of the omitted child."

The ambiguity here seems to be whether the "one or more children" have to be alive at the time the will was executed, or whether the later-born omitted child counts for purposes of this exception. I think the code means that at least one child has to be alive at the time the will was made, because otherwise you can't draw as strong an inference that leaving the entire estate to the other parent was intended as a way to provide for the children as well.

Can anyone shed light on this for me?

I'm pretty sure that your outcome and reasoning are correct and those model answers are just wrong. Let me check my notes.

Edit: Assuming that you're not omitting any material facts from the problem or answer, you are correct. Here's Barbri's statement of the rule: "Second exception: At the time of execution of the testamentary instrument, the decedent had one or more children and transferred by will or revocable inter vivos trust substantially all of his estate to the parent of the omitted child."

Thanks! I don't think I missed anything from the problem or answer, but it was February 2007, if you want to take a look. It just seemed weird to me that they published two answers that both came to the wrong result in applying that exception.

I agree too. I was concerned about this issue as well. The model answer for baressays says that the child does not inherit since the parents did not have any children.

[s1m4]

Just curious --

Are you guys going to stop looking at MBEs completely at one point and just focus on the essays?

Are you guys planning on looking at anymore practice tests?

[iLoveFruits&Veggies]

Just curious --

Are you guys going to stop looking at MBEs completely at one point and just focus on the essays?

Are you guys planning on looking at anymore practice tests?

I'm going to continue to do 20-25 practice MBEs a day... and review issue spotting (my weakness) and try to memorize the rules. Not sure if I'll be writing out any more practice tests or performance exams though. Seems so time consuming - although, I'm sure it's helpful to do them. The only area I feel good about right now are the MBEs. Everything else is a big MESS. Starting to panic and not sure how to tackle the remaining 3 weeks.

[LSATNightmares]

Just curious --

Are you guys going to stop looking at MBEs completely at one point and just focus on the essays?

Are you guys planning on looking at anymore practice tests?

I will still do MBEs. I will do practice tests. I'm following the Barbri program, and I don't want to put all of my eggs in one basket. But I've been pretty good so far about doing all of the essays, so I'm a little less nervous than I was before about them.

[a male human]

Reposting this from the Themis thread, probably should have posted here since it's a CA-specific question. Curious how Barbri or others explain this rule...

I'm pretty sure that your outcome and reasoning are correct and those model answers are just wrong. Let me check my notes.

Edit: Assuming that you're not omitting any material facts from the problem or answer, you are correct. Here's Barbri's statement of the rule: "Second exception: At the time of execution of the testamentary instrument, the decedent had one or more children and transferred by will or revocable inter vivos trust substantially all of his estate to the parent of the omitted child."

Thanks! I don't think I missed anything from the problem or answer, but it was February 2007, if you want to take a look. It just seemed weird to me that they published two answers that both came to the wrong result in applying that exception.

I agree too. I was concerned about this issue as well. The model answer for baressays says that the child does not inherit since the parents did not have any children.

Do understand the rules written by actual examinees may or may not be completely accurate.

If anyone needs $20 off a BarEssays sub, PM me for a code.

[Carryon]

I was wondering what a good wpm typing speed is (assuming good accuracy) for this bar exam? My typing speed is now about 25 WPM.

[injun]

Based on the discussion regarding lower passing scores (i.e. 60s as opposed to 65s), what do you guys think will be an acceptable average score for the essays this summer? I am hopeful that I can score at least 65s on the PTs. Thanks for any info!

[Carryon]

Based on the discussion regarding lower passing scores (i.e. 60s as opposed to 65s), what do you guys think will be an acceptable average score for the essays this summer? I am hopeful that I can score at least 65s on the PTs. Thanks for any info!

Here was the formula for the written scaled score for the February 2014 bar. Written scaled score = (Raw written score x 3.1584) - 460.6635. According to my calculations, if you average 60 on the essays and pts your score is 1434.378, which is close to the passing score of 1440.

This was for the attorney exam. As you can see if one essay score was 62 instead of 60, then you get 1440.6, a passing score.

[umstah]

how good does an essay have to be to score a ~60 ?

[injun]

Thanks, Carryon! I'm planning to take the 3-Day exam, so I'm guessing the calculations will be a little different for me.

[Carryon]

Thanks, Carryon! I'm planning to take the 3-Day exam, so I'm guessing the calculations will be a little different for me.

I think that the formula would be the same for the written portion. They just would weight it differently when combined with the MBE. I think the written portion is weighted around 67 percent of your score.

[Carryon]

how good does an essay have to be to score a ~60 ?

Not sure. Several factors are determined. For example, how difficult the question is one. I have been looking at graded exams on baressays.com and it seems like if you get the major issues with most of the elements for each issue except for maybe 1 issue you get around 65. Anybody else have any thoughts?

[injun]

Baressays is a good source to get an idea, but I still find it hard to define a minimum number of issues that you have to spot to get a particular score.

[Carryon]

Baressays is a good source to get an idea, but I still find it hard to define a minimum number of issues that you have to spot to get a particular score.

The premium subscription rate at baressays will show graded essays and some essays with comments from a grader. Those comments will usually tell how many issues were missed.

[adonai]

how good does an essay have to be to score a ~60 ?

Not sure. Several factors are determined. For example, how difficult the question is one. I have been looking at graded exams on baressays.com and it seems like if you get the major issues with most of the elements for each issue except for maybe 1 issue you get around 65. Anybody else have any thoughts?

I've seen essays where they missed almost half the issues and got a 65. I've also seen some where they got a majority and got a 55. It really depends and I'm still not sure how they grade this. I heard you can get up to 25 points on just having good structure and sounding "lawyerly." Similarly I've heard you can get an auto 65 even though your essay really deserved a lower score substantively.

If it is true that they take only 2 min to grade an essay, then it would make sense that much if not most of their grading is based on feeling

[james11]

how good does an essay have to be to score a ~60 ?

Not sure. Several factors are determined. For example, how difficult the question is one. I have been looking at graded exams on baressays.com and it seems like if you get the major issues with most of the elements for each issue except for maybe 1 issue you get around 65. Anybody else have any thoughts?

I've seen essays where they missed almost half the issues and got a 65. I've also seen some where they got a majority and got a 55. It really depends and I'm still not sure how they grade this. I heard you can get up to 25 points on just having good structure and sounding "lawyerly." Similarly I've heard you can get an auto 65 even though your essay really deserved a lower score substantively.

If it is true that they take only 2 min to grade an essay, then it would make sense that much if not most of their grading is based on feeling

I think you need to differentiate between major issues and minor/sub issues. You can't miss half the major issues and get a 65. You can't miss more than one major and get a 65. Minor or sub-issues are different.

[Carryon]

how good does an essay have to be to score a ~60 ?

Not sure. Several factors are determined. For example, how difficult the question is one. I have been looking at graded exams on baressays.com and it seems like if you get the major issues with most of the elements for each issue except for maybe 1 issue you get around 65. Anybody else have any thoughts?

I've seen essays where they missed almost half the issues and got a 65. I've also seen some where they got a majority and got a 55. It really depends and I'm still not sure how they grade this. I heard you can get up to 25 points on just having good structure and sounding "lawyerly." Similarly I've heard you can get an auto 65 even though your essay really deserved a lower score substantively.

If it is true that they take only 2 min to grade an essay, then it would make sense that much if not most of their grading is based on feeling

I think you need to differentiate between major issues and minor/sub issues. You can't miss half the major issues and get a 65. You can't miss more than one major and get a 65. Minor or sub-issues are different.

Yes, I think getting all of the elements for each issue and analyzing the facts and concluding correctly counts too. I also think the harder questions are graded on a "curve", so maybe someone missed a few issues but still got a 65 since it was a hard question.

[Charles Barkley]

Baressays is a good source to get an idea, but I still find it hard to define a minimum number of issues that you have to spot to get a particular score.

The premium subscription rate at baressays will show graded essays and some essays with comments from a grader. Those comments will usually tell how many issues were missed.

How I do access the comments? What do I have to click?

I have a premium sub, but have just been reading over the model answers / bar taker essays (without comments)