BarBri - NY Exam - July 2014 Forum

[belowthelaw57]

Thanks. Any word on if that's just for NY or if it counts for the MBE too (in which case the prior lecturer is a lying sack of crap)?

I guess a lot of ppl were asking barbri about this one, haha. They posted this announcement:

According to the New York Bar Examiners, any changes in the law from more than six months ago can potentially be tested on the July Bar Exam. During his Constitutional Law lecture, Professor Lisnek indicated that decisions within the last two years are not likely to be tested. While this is a true statement, it is important to be familiar with recent decisions mentioned during lecture.

The Daimler AG v. Bauman decision occurred in January. That decision will be seven months old when the July 2014 Bar Exam takes place. As a result, you should treat the new law from this decision as testable on the July Bar Exam. This decision is a recent one, and we believe it is not likely to be tested. However, you should be prepared to answer any questions regarding this topic using the new law cited by Professor Alexander in his New York Practice lecture.

And that's just wrong. Lisnek said it cannot be on the bar unless it's 3 years old--not that it's "unlikely." They're covering for him. Also, the guy that did the MBE Con Law Workshop Lecture said the same thing. I think the Crim guy said something similar too.

[greenjuice]

I also remember hearing that in a couple of those MBE diagnostic review lectures. Maybe it's a NY bar examiners/NCBE distinction in approaches?

[peanut123]

Anyone else running out of steam already? Maybe it's just the NY Practice getting to me; this lecture seems unnecessarily long. 50 minutes discussing something we only need to know for terminology and context?

[AJS30]

Anyone else running out of steam already? Maybe it's just the NY Practice getting to me; this lecture seems unnecessarily long. 50 minutes discussing something we only need to know for terminology and context?

Me. I just took my hour lunch break and really just wish I could stop for the day. Having anxiety because there are subjects like Evidence that I do not understand, and feel like I don't have time to go back and review. I felt like there were some other things that he could have thrown into the NY Practice lecture, but I will go back to my outline from school to refresh my memory. I have been doing MBE questions from supplemental sources so that takes a lot of time to review and go over, but I feel like barbri is lacking on assigning more MBE questions.

Also, I probably should know this by now but for the essay portion if there is NY distinction should we just write that or put the common law as well. For example, with option contracts, would you write: Under the common law, an option contract exists where consideration is provided so that an offer remains open and cannot be revoked. However, under New York Law, where an offeror promises and signs in writing that a offer will remain open, that offer cannot be revoked, even though no consideration was provided.

[belowthelaw57]

Anyone else running out of steam already? Maybe it's just the NY Practice getting to me; this lecture seems unnecessarily long. 50 minutes discussing something we only need to know for terminology and context?

Me. I just took my hour lunch break and really just wish I could stop for the day. Having anxiety because there are subjects like Evidence that I do not understand, and feel like I don't have time to go back and review. I felt like there were some other things that he could have thrown into the NY Practice lecture, but I will go back to my outline from school to refresh my memory. I have been doing MBE questions from supplemental sources so that takes a lot of time to review and go over, but I feel like barbri is lacking on assigning more MBE questions.

Also, I probably should know this by now but for the essay portion if there is NY distinction should we just write that or put the common law as well. For example, with option contracts, would you write: Under the common law, an option contract exists where consideration is provided so that an offer remains open and cannot be revoked. However, under New York Law, where an offeror promises and signs in writing that a offer will remain open, that offer cannot be revoked, even though no consideration was provided.

This is just opinion, but I'm pretty sure the only time you would ever do that is when there is relevant federal law and New York law--crim pro being the most obvious example of something we've covered so far. I don't see how could it help you to expound about the law in some random jurisdiction? The only reason you do it in crim pro is because both the 4th Amendment and the New York Constitution apply because the federal constitution is a floor. Sometimes New York goes farther and they want you to know that. Another state's law though, is completely irrelevant and never applicable unless you're doing something like conflict of laws.

[turquoiseturtle]

Has anyone else still not gotten the graded MPT back? I was surprised when they sent out the "average" because I definitely turned mine in on time but haven't gotten it back.

[nygrrrl]

Has anyone else still not gotten the graded MPT back? I was surprised when they sent out the "average" because I definitely turned mine in on time but haven't gotten it back.

Don't have mine back, emailed them. Was told the rest of them would be returned tomorrow (did not question the problem with releasing an "average" before all samples appear to have been "graded.")

[greenjuice]

Has anyone done the essay that we were assigned for today? Was the NY rule for answer 3b in the blue outline books? B/c I don't think it was in the lecture or CMR. How are we supposed to answer the questions if they don't give us the rules we need to know?

[Stringer6]

Has anyone done the essay that we were assigned for today? Was the NY rule for answer 3b in the blue outline books? B/c I don't think it was in the lecture or CMR. How are we supposed to answer the questions if they don't give us the rules we need to know?

It was in the lecture handout -- liquidated damages

[peanut123]

Has anyone done the essay that we were assigned for today? Was the NY rule for answer 3b in the blue outline books? B/c I don't think it was in the lecture or CMR. How are we supposed to answer the questions if they don't give us the rules we need to know?

It was in the lecture handout -- liquidated damages

Yeah I wrote in a note on the bottom of page 45 that a NY rule is that in real estate ks, S can keep B's down payment even if it would otherwise be a penalty. (It was not part of the outline, just something he mentioned, and I got this wrong on the essay). But I'm not clear on whether there has to first BE a liquidated damages clause. The facts in this essay said there was no provision for remedies. So is a down payment automatically liquidated damages in real estate ks? The answer seems to suggest that, since they don't address the absence of the liquidated damages clause.

[Stringer6]

Has anyone done the essay that we were assigned for today? Was the NY rule for answer 3b in the blue outline books? B/c I don't think it was in the lecture or CMR. How are we supposed to answer the questions if they don't give us the rules we need to know?

It was in the lecture handout -- liquidated damages

Yeah I wrote in a note on the bottom of page 45 that a NY rule is that in real estate ks, S can keep B's down payment even if it would otherwise be a penalty. (It was not part of the outline, just something he mentioned, and I got this wrong on the essay). But I'm not clear on whether there has to first BE a liquidated damages clause. The facts in this essay said there was no provision for remedies. So is a down payment automatically liquidated damages in real estate ks? The answer seems to suggest that, since they don't address the absence of the liquidated damages clause.

that tripped me up too. seemed like Sarah just pulled "liquidated damages" out of her ass; there was no mention of a liquidated damages clause at all. on the essay, i wrote what was on the bottom of page 45, but i was confused because i didn't think there was an actual liquidated damages clause.

i might submit a question to Barbri about it.

[greenjuice]

Has anyone done the essay that we were assigned for today? Was the NY rule for answer 3b in the blue outline books? B/c I don't think it was in the lecture or CMR. How are we supposed to answer the questions if they don't give us the rules we need to know?

It was in the lecture handout -- liquidated damages

Yeah I wrote in a note on the bottom of page 45 that a NY rule is that in real estate ks, S can keep B's down payment even if it would otherwise be a penalty. (It was not part of the outline, just something he mentioned, and I got this wrong on the essay). But I'm not clear on whether there has to first BE a liquidated damages clause. The facts in this essay said there was no provision for remedies. So is a down payment automatically liquidated damages in real estate ks? The answer seems to suggest that, since they don't address the absence of the liquidated damages clause.

that tripped me up too. seemed like Sarah just pulled "liquidated damages" out of her ass; there was no mention of a liquidated damages clause at all. on the essay, i wrote what was on the bottom of page 45, but i was confused because i didn't think there was an actual liquidated damages clause.

i might submit a question to Barbri about it.

Thanks stringer & peanut. I didn't even think to mention that because I didn't think there was a liquidated damages clause in the first place. The answer key is kind of conclusory. It just says, "Where a down payment constitutes a valid liquidated damages clause," but doesn't specify if/why that's met in this contract. Oh well, this will be a good reminder that I don't need to know all the law to get a passing grade (I hope )

[prs362]

Good to read the above comments. That was the first essay I felt fairly confident about, but I totally screwed up 3b.

[plath]

Real property is killing me

plus I dreamed of N'sync tonight

[prs362]

Real property is killing me

plus I dreamed of N'sync tonight

As bad as RP is, it is a breath of fresh air compared to the 3 days from hell that was NY Practice.

[peanut123]

Am I missing something or is there no handout for the torts lecture? Even looking on the website there is no inactive "Handout" link as for other lectures not yet available. Really hoping we don't have to take full notes for three days of lecture.

[5ky]

Last year the torts guy didn't provide a handout and said he liked it better without and students taking notes.

It was whatever. I just made an outline as we went along and used that.

[Stringer6]

Last year the torts guy didn't provide a handout and said he liked it better without and students taking notes.

It was whatever. I just made an outline as we went along and used that.

hope it helped him when he took the exam

[peanut123]

Last year the torts guy didn't provide a handout and said he liked it better without and students taking notes.

It was whatever. I just made an outline as we went along and used that.

Thanks for the response. Good to know what to expect. Gotta say, this will seriously cramp my style of watching at 2x speed if I have to take full notes.

But ditto to stringer. I already have a grudge.

[AJS30]

If you had to approximate the score of those whose answers are used as the sample for the released essays as they are superior to the average score, what would you think they received? 7 or 8?

I was flipping through the essay book before and just looking at some of the answers and I really don't think I could pull off anything close to some of the things that people have been able to do, granted there is the disclaimer that the law may not be right, etc. Kind of wishing that the bar exam was open book like law school.

[prs362]

If you had to approximate the score of those whose answers are used as the sample for the released essays as they are superior to the average score, what would you think they received? 7 or 8?

I was flipping through the essay book before and just looking at some of the answers and I really don't think I could pull off anything close to some of the things that people have been able to do, granted there is the disclaimer that the law may not be right, etc. Kind of wishing that the bar exam was open book like law school.

This is especially true for ridiculous, non-conceptual subjects like NY Practice. Spending one hour learning 20, 10, 7, 5, 4, 3, 2, 2 and 6 mos, 1 and 90 days, 1, and 4 mo statutes of limitations is indescribably annoying.

[greenjuice]

Did Barbri give us anything telling us what we're supposed to be scoring on the NYMC assignments (similar to MBE target scores)? Because unless the target score is "abysmal or worse," I am probably not meeting them...

I sent this in as a question but I got an answer copying and pasting the info on how your total score is calculated on the real exam

[belowthelaw57]

Did Barbri give us anything telling us what we're supposed to be scoring on the NYMC assignments (similar to MBE target scores)? Because unless the target score is "abysmal or worse," I am probably not meeting them...

I sent this in as a question but I got an answer copying and pasting the info on how your total score is calculated on the real exam

Depends on your MPT, MBE, and NY Essay scores. This calculator can give you a good idea.

http://www.seperac.com/calc-matrix-f14.php

[plath]

Did Barbri give us anything telling us what we're supposed to be scoring on the NYMC assignments (similar to MBE target scores)? Because unless the target score is "abysmal or worse," I am probably not meeting them...

I sent this in as a question but I got an answer copying and pasting the info on how your total score is calculated on the real exam

Depends on your MPT, MBE, and NY Essay scores. This calculator can give you a good idea.

http://www.seperac.com/calc-matrix-f14.php

According to this calculator, if you answer only 60.5% of the MBE correctly, you can pass with getting only 15/50 correct on the NYMC and an average of 30 (!) on the essays and MPT?! does that (encouraging) conclusion make sense or am I missing something here?

[belowthelaw57]

Did Barbri give us anything telling us what we're supposed to be scoring on the NYMC assignments (similar to MBE target scores)? Because unless the target score is "abysmal or worse," I am probably not meeting them...

I sent this in as a question but I got an answer copying and pasting the info on how your total score is calculated on the real exam

Depends on your MPT, MBE, and NY Essay scores. This calculator can give you a good idea.

http://www.seperac.com/calc-matrix-f14.php

According to this calculator, if you answer only 60.5% of the MBE correctly, you can pass with getting only 15/50 correct on the NYMC and an average of 30 (!) on the essays and MPT?! does that (encouraging) conclusion make sense or am I missing something here?

No, you'd probably fail. You need at least a 665 scaled final score to pass. 60.5% raw score on the MBE would be 115 questions out of the 190 graded. You'd need a 50 average score on MPT/Essays to pass on the July '13 Curve, 54 average on the February '13 Curve.