Barbri paced program question? Forum

[northwood]

anyone have any idea whether we get penalized for arguing in the alternative on an essay?
I just did one where I wasn't sure what rule applied. I know you get points for that type of thing on a law school exam, but will you be penalized on a bar exam (since the rules are supposed to be obvious).

as long as i'm not penalized I'm fine if I get no credit.

I think they just give you no points.... but if you manage to annoy the grader, or make the grader have to work harder to find points to give you ( i.e you start to ramble and hit a few key words), they may not take the time to do the required work; and simply take a glance, look at it like "meh- this essay writer doesn't know what they are doing/ talking about no points; onto the next one).

the people grading your essays have a ton to read, and most of them do this on top of working. so they don't put a lot of time into your essay. the less effort you have to make them do to identify your key points the better...

also- arguing both sides takes longer. just pick a side and go. If you think of this is one big trial, you don't see the prosecutor offer evidence to hurt his case just so he/she can knock it down, no they just go after points that they want the jury to hear, remember and apply in their decision making process. Here you just want the grader to hear that you know the issue,the rule and can argue a side ( right or wrong) using the facts given and can come up with a logical conclusion. do this, then they will be persuaded that you know what you are doing, rendering a verdict in your favor ( i.e. a passing score on the essay)

[Flips88]

anyone have any idea whether we get penalized for arguing in the alternative on an essay?
I just did one where I wasn't sure what rule applied. I know you get points for that type of thing on a law school exam, but will you be penalized on a bar exam (since the rules are supposed to be obvious).

as long as i'm not penalized I'm fine if I get no credit.

Some of the model answers have little bracket explanations that say it would be reasonably to conclude the other way on some things. I think like Northwood said you don't need to argue both sides so much as pick a side and analyze to show why the rule produces the result. I think you can hedge a little in how you frame your answer as in "The court will likely [do x]" or "The contract is probably not enforceable."

[nygrrrl]

PSA: The Everett Chambers video under additional resources on what to do when you don't know a rule of law on an essay is surprisingly helpful. The Gist is to make up some rule of law that will allow you to discuss all the facts. That way you will have a wrong rule of law and probably a wrong conclusion, but you can still pick up a ton of points on the analysis. According to the video, the examiner will think you're competent but you just got the wrong conclusion bc you relied upon the wrong rule of law. Still, you show you can make a strong, thoughtful analysis.

You may have already known that, but it was news to me. I hope it's helpful to others.

Thanks for the heads up - I was thinking about watching that right before bed tonight, as I'm planning to put in time on the essays this weekend.

[adonai]

Argue both sides when it's merited/necessary. Why wouldn't you argue both sides when they obviously put in a vague fact? They made it vague so you argue both sides. If they wanted a certain conclusion they wouldn't have done that.

[jd20132013]

See, I don't think it's vague. I think I just can't remember the right rule of law (and when I checked that seemed to be the case).

I don't think it's like law school exams in that respect.

SN: Anyone else having trouble sleeping? i would swear I'm not that nervous but this seems to indicate otherwise

[mvpforme]

Argue both sides when it's merited/necessary. Why wouldn't you argue both sides when they obviously put in a vague fact? They made it vague so you argue both sides. If they wanted a certain conclusion they wouldn't have done that.

Most of the model answers I have seen

C - A will prevail because he is an HDC.
I - Issue
R - Rule
A - A will prevail because he is an HDC.

C - A will prevail because he is an HDC.

I see it more as a conclusory analysis of the losing party's weaknesses than arguing both sides.

[july14bar]

Just found the following excerpt from an email sent out to July 2013 examinees from my state's board of law examiners:

9. Don't guess, or speculate, or attempt to create new rules of law. Erroneous statements will deduct from your grade.

Should I take this seriously? It seems like half of the essay section will require speculation. They can't expect us just to leave entire subparts blank, can they? How would yall handle this? (Note: This was posted on a blog. It's not on the BLE website and I haven't received a similar email).

[At the Drive-In]

Just found the following excerpt from an email sent out to July 2013 examinees from my state's board of law examiners:

9. Don't guess, or speculate, or attempt to create new rules of law. Erroneous statements will deduct from your grade.

Should I take this seriously? It seems like half of the essay section will require speculation. They can't expect us just to leave entire subparts blank, can they? How would yall handle this? (Note: This was posted on a blog. It's not on the BLE website and I haven't received a similar email).

I am 99% sure you are in the same state as me. They attached those same list of guidelines when they sent out seating assignments for this year. I think the blog's analysis of what that means is pretty good. You can't say "this is a lorem ipsum action" but you can say this is a strict products liability action even if you aren't quite sure what you have to prove to go forward with that. Applying barely-relevant or inapplicable real law is probably better than just making something totally off base up.

In short, you can't invent new legal principles, but you can invent some of the elements that goes into those legal principles. At least that's what I am going to do if it comes down to it. They have been tweaking this essay stuff the past few years, and there isn't a lot of info about any past-graded essays floating around.

That being said, if it comes down to a situation where you just don't know what to do in any way, shape, or form is making something up really much worse than leaving it blank? I doubt it.

I also think that the blog is spot-on when they are just writing these rules to stop things that Barbri told us to do. They have specifically told us to "make law up if you don't know any" and circulate that story about "asking another attorney for advice because I can't give advice if I'm not competent," and those guidelines say don't do any one of those.

[july14bar]

Just found the following excerpt from an email sent out to July 2013 examinees from my state's board of law examiners:

9. Don't guess, or speculate, or attempt to create new rules of law. Erroneous statements will deduct from your grade.

Should I take this seriously? It seems like half of the essay section will require speculation. They can't expect us just to leave entire subparts blank, can they? How would yall handle this? (Note: This was posted on a blog. It's not on the BLE website and I haven't received a similar email).

I am 99% sure you are in the same state as me. They attached those same list of guidelines when they sent out seating assignments for this year. I think the blog's analysis of what that means is pretty good. You can't say "this is a lorem ipsum action" but you can say this is a strict products liability action even if you aren't quite sure what you have to prove to go forward with that. Applying barely-relevant or inapplicable real law is probably better than just making something totally off base up.

In short, you can't invent new legal principles, but you can invent some of the elements that goes into those legal principles. At least that's what I am going to do if it comes down to it. They have been tweaking this essay stuff the past few years, and there isn't a lot of info about any past-graded essays floating around.

That being said, if it comes down to a situation where you just don't know what to do in any way, shape, or form is making something up really much worse than leaving it blank? I doubt it.

I also think that the blog is spot-on when they are just writing these rules to stop things that Barbri told us to do. They have specifically told us to "make law up if you don't know any" and circulate that story about "asking another attorney for advice because I can't give advice if I'm not competent," and those guidelines say don't do any one of those.

Yeah, I remember realizing that we're in the same state earlier in this thread. There's not too many of us around here! And you're right-- I found the list in the seating assignment email. Barbri should probably consider revising their essay suggestions.

This whole 'no guessing' thing bothers me because I've encountered several essays where my entire answer would be a guess-- even if I had the CMR right in front of me (like last year's consignments question).

[The Egyptian]

I just bombed the second set of torts MBE. Is it just me or did the lecture not cover a lot of material that they test on.

I took a one week break from Torts and just did that this evening. Got a 8/18... whooo!

Sue them for negligent infliction of emotional distress.

[The Egyptian]

Just found the following excerpt from an email sent out to July 2013 examinees from my state's board of law examiners:

9. Don't guess, or speculate, or attempt to create new rules of law. Erroneous statements will deduct from your grade.

Should I take this seriously? It seems like half of the essay section will require speculation. They can't expect us just to leave entire subparts blank, can they? How would yall handle this? (Note: This was posted on a blog. It's not on the BLE website and I haven't received a similar email).

I am 99% sure you are in the same state as me. They attached those same list of guidelines when they sent out seating assignments for this year. I think the blog's analysis of what that means is pretty good. You can't say "this is a lorem ipsum action" but you can say this is a strict products liability action even if you aren't quite sure what you have to prove to go forward with that. Applying barely-relevant or inapplicable real law is probably better than just making something totally off base up.

In short, you can't invent new legal principles, but you can invent some of the elements that goes into those legal principles. At least that's what I am going to do if it comes down to it. They have been tweaking this essay stuff the past few years, and there isn't a lot of info about any past-graded essays floating around.

That being said, if it comes down to a situation where you just don't know what to do in any way, shape, or form is making something up really much worse than leaving it blank? I doubt it.

I also think that the blog is spot-on when they are just writing these rules to stop things that Barbri told us to do. They have specifically told us to "make law up if you don't know any" and circulate that story about "asking another attorney for advice because I can't give advice if I'm not competent," and those guidelines say don't do any one of those.

Yeah, I remember realizing that we're in the same state earlier in this thread. There's not too many of us around here! And you're right-- I found the list in the seating assignment email. Barbri should probably consider revising their essay suggestions.

This whole 'no guessing' thing bothers me because I've encountered several essays where my entire answer would be a guess-- even if I had the CMR right in front of me (like last year's consignments question).

Maybe, in that state, probative value of a made-up rule of law, will substantially outweigh their knowledge, and lead to the confusion of the issue in the minds of the graders

I wouldn't wear a Guess jeans that day, if I were you.

[plath]

[taking the chance your answers will freak me out]

Are you guys actually re-reviewing the CMR as PP suggests? I try to do a fair amount of MBE's and essays each day (have completely ignored the MPT) and I'm going over my condensed outlines and flashcards for review of the topics assigned each day. However, I have not opened the CMR recently (for most topics not at all, not even before lectures).

Obviously the lectures don't cover everything but I just assume most testables come up on the essay answers anyhow, so not sure how efficient reading 20 pages of agency will be at this stage.

Just curious what others are doing.

[Heat]

[taking the chance your answers will freak me out]

Are you guys actually re-reviewing the CMR as PP suggests? I try to do a fair amount of MBE's and essays each day (have completely ignored the MPT) and I'm going over my condensed outlines and flashcards for review of the topics assigned each day. However, I have not opened the CMR recently (for most topics not at all, not even before lectures).

Obviously the lectures don't cover everything but I just assume most testables come up on the essay answers anyhow, so not sure how efficient reading 20 pages of agency will be at this stage.

Just curious what others are doing.

I re-read the CMR for Real Property because I'm awful at it. I also re-read the CMR for contracts because I figured it also hits Article 2, so its like a two for one. I probably won't read any of the other CMRs again, but I did read the ones on the MBE subjects the first time we were told to.

[jd20132013]

[taking the chance your answers will freak me out]

Are you guys actually re-reviewing the CMR as PP suggests? I try to do a fair amount of MBE's and essays each day (have completely ignored the MPT) and I'm going over my condensed outlines and flashcards for review of the topics assigned each day. However, I have not opened the CMR recently (for most topics not at all, not even before lectures).

Obviously the lectures don't cover everything but I just assume most testables come up on the essay answers anyhow, so not sure how efficient reading 20 pages of agency will be at this stage.

Just curious what others are doing.

I am not. I don't think it makes sense to read a bunch of stuff I know already to find stuff I don't know. If it's important at all, it will come up during the practice MBEs. I'd rather do more MBEs and learn more of the law and get it ingrained and risk having a few questions come up that I miss because I didn't reread the CMR than reread the CMR and lose a bunch of time I could be doing questions.

I review every answer to every question, even the ones I get right, instead.

[plath]

I review every answer to every question, even the ones I get right, instead

Yes, I do this as well. Mainly b/c I sometimes feel I can master the BLL and still get some MBE's wrong as applying the law is a whole different thing.

[salvage]

I have a wills question. For elective share, the lecture tells us that all the money in a totten trust goes to the spouse, even if the totten trust was for a completely different person. Is this true? So the person who the money was "in trust for" gets completely screwed by the surviving spouse? If so, then what the hell is the point of a totten trust in the first place?

[northwood]

I have a wills question. For elective share, the lecture tells us that all the money in a totten trust goes to the spouse, even if the totten trust was for a completely different person. Is this true? So the person who the money was "in trust for" gets completely screwed by the surviving spouse? If so, then what the hell is the point of a totten trust in the first place?

I think the answer to your question will depend by what state you are in

[Sandro]

Would anyone like to share their barbri percentile ranks / avg % correct on the MPQ/Studysmart MBE things? I recently have calmed myself by reading up on how the Barbri questions are harder and how getting a 56% on a particular MPQ set is their stated "goal", but now im wondering how much more MBE i should really be doing.

I'm above Barbri's computed 55th percentile on all topics vs other students, getting 60%+ right on each topic. Does that mean I can stop worrying about doing miserably on the MBE and start studying more for essays ?

[salvage]

I have a wills question. For elective share, the lecture tells us that all the money in a totten trust goes to the spouse, even if the totten trust was for a completely different person. Is this true? So the person who the money was "in trust for" gets completely screwed by the surviving spouse? If so, then what the hell is the point of a totten trust in the first place?

I think the answer to your question will depend by what state you are in

Sorry, NY. Hence the confusion: Erica is not so Fine at teaching.

[encore1101]

I have a wills question. For elective share, the lecture tells us that all the money in a totten trust goes to the spouse, even if the totten trust was for a completely different person. Is this true? So the person who the money was "in trust for" gets completely screwed by the surviving spouse? If so, then what the hell is the point of a totten trust in the first place?

I think the answer to your question will depend by what state you are in

Sorry, NY. Hence the confusion: Erica is not so Fine at teaching.

cheesy, but i lol'd

[northwood]

I have a wills question. For elective share, the lecture tells us that all the money in a totten trust goes to the spouse, even if the totten trust was for a completely different person. Is this true? So the person who the money was "in trust for" gets completely screwed by the surviving spouse? If so, then what the hell is the point of a totten trust in the first place?

I think the answer to your question will depend by what state you are in

Sorry, NY. Hence the confusion: Erica is not so Fine at teaching.

Totten trust goes to the beneficiary when the testator dies. However, a totten trust is considered to be a non probate asset under the EPTL. Thus EPTL 5-3.1 is applicable in regards to a totten trust. Here the spouse can elect up to $25,000 of the trust, which the beneficiary of the trust will have to contribute to the electing spouse up to that amount.

So in this hypo the trustee gets to keep anything above $25,000 in the totten trust account.

Note that the entire trust account is used to determine the testamentary substitutes, which if the total is over 150K, the spouse gets to elect 50,000 plus 1/2 of the interests as her( or his) net elective share.

[turquoiseturtle]

I have a wills question. For elective share, the lecture tells us that all the money in a totten trust goes to the spouse, even if the totten trust was for a completely different person. Is this true? So the person who the money was "in trust for" gets completely screwed by the surviving spouse? If so, then what the hell is the point of a totten trust in the first place?

I think the answer to your question will depend by what state you are in

Sorry, NY. Hence the confusion: Erica is not so Fine at teaching.

Totten trust goes to the beneficiary when the testator dies. However, a totten trust is considered to be a non probate asset under the EPTL. Thus EPTL 5-3.1 is applicable in regards to a totten trust. Here the spouse can elect up to $25,000 of the trust, which the beneficiary of the trust will have to contribute to the electing spouse up to that amount.

So in this hypo the trustee gets to keep anything above $25,000 in the totten trust account.

Note that the entire trust account is used to determine the testamentary substitutes, which if the total is over 150K, the spouse gets to elect 50,000 plus 1/2 of the interests as her( or his) net elective share.

Question about this. The beneficiary gets to keep anything above $25,000... but that is because of the exempt personal property set-aside of cash up to $25,000? So while true that the totten trust could be the only cash, and thus a $25,000 totten trust the spouse would keep everything, if there is lots of other cash/property involved, its possible that the spouse wouldn't touch any of it right?

Agree with the whole thing going into augmented estate, but then the amount the spouse might get is totally dependent on the other property of the estate.

[northwood]

Totten trust goes to the beneficiary when the testator dies. However, a totten trust is considered to be a non probate asset under the EPTL. Thus EPTL 5-3.1 is applicable in regards to a totten trust. Here the spouse can elect up to $25,000 of the trust, which the beneficiary of the trust will have to contribute to the electing spouse up to that amount.

So in this hypo the trustee gets to keep anything above $25,000 in the totten trust account.

Note that the entire trust account is used to determine the testamentary substitutes, which if the total is over 150K, the spouse gets to elect 50,000 plus 1/2 of the interests as her( or his) net elective share.[/quote]

Question about this. The beneficiary gets to keep anything above $25,000... but that is because of the exempt personal property set-aside of cash up to $25,000? So while true that the totten trust could be the only cash, and thus a $25,000 totten trust the spouse would keep everything, if there is lots of other cash/property involved, its possible that the spouse wouldn't touch any of it right?

Agree with the whole thing going into augmented estate, but then the amount the spouse might get is totally dependent on the other property of the estate.[/quote]


Under the spousal elective share provision of the EPTL, in NY the spouse gets to elect up to 92,500. this number comes from $20,000 worth of household goods, $2,500 worth of bibles,books, dvds, records, music cds, $20,000 worth of domestic and farm animals and food to feed them for 6 months, $25,000 worth of stocks, bonds, trusts, bank accounts ( in the decedents name only- joint accounts are automatically the other persons), and $25,000 in a single car ( fair market value- outstanding loans on the vehicle gives you the value of the car.. so if you have a $40,000 vehicle and owe $20,000 on the loan, the car is worth $20,000 in the eyes of the surrogates court and you get to keep the entire car free and clear. I f the car is worth more than $25,000 then the spouse who wants it has to pay the difference back into the estate

so to answer your question, it depends on what the other property is and the like. the house itself goes to the spouse if its a Tenancy by entirety, but as for the rest, the court will adhere to these guidelines.

[salvage]

Thanks. Although I may be more confused now. Think I'll just go w/ language to the effect that a TT is a t-sub and thus is part of the net estate when calculating the elective share.

[northwood]

Thanks. Although I may be more confused now. Think I'll just go w/ language to the effect that a TT is a t-sub and thus is part of the net estate when calculating the elective share.

yea it is confusing, but if you see it on an essay question they will tell you what you need to know and where its going ( most likely to the surviving spouse) or something else that will make it easier to discuss.

remember you only have 40 minutes per essay or about 10 minutes per issue ( assuming they give you 4 issues to discuss) so it wont be that extensive