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

[BK88]

I'm 95% sure the following Barbri question for today is wrong. Set2Question8 of today's property set.

It says O conveyed a land to a veterinarian, but if the property is used for any other purpose, it is to go to the American Cancer Society.

American Cancer Society executory interest is void because of REA. Therefore what remains is: "O conveyed a land to a veterinarian, but if the property is used for any other purpose" In this case, this fee simple determinable would simply read "from O to A" and A would hold in fee simple absolute. Had the conveyance been "so long as the property..." then the fee simple determinable remains and the grantor gets a possibility of reverter. (I quote a book on this stuff below)

Well, Barbri's right answer says the friend must have joined the sale of land because the friend had a possibility of reverter (the vet attempted to sell the land in Fee simple absolute and later refused, a buyer sued for specific performance). But everything points to the conclusion that the vet actually had the land in fee simple absolute.

"For example, if the void future interest is struck from the conveyance 'to A, but if the property is used to sell alcoholic beverages, to B" the grant will simply read 'to A' and A will hold in fee simple absolute. On the other hand, if the conveyance reads 'To A, so long as the property is not used to sell alcoholic beverages, then to B' only the phrase 'then to B' would be struck; A will still have a fee simple determinable but the grantor will take a possibility of reverter[.]"

Am I right?

Sounds right to me

[BK88]

Anyone else getting absolutely murdered by property? Everything else i'm hovering in the 58th - 81st percentile for...and property i'm hovering around 38%

[LionelHutzJD]

I'm not sure if your right but my god some of these barbri questions are IMPOSSIBLE. Especially RP. Please have mercy on us BOLE. Also, I felt so miserable today after K's lecture. I understand the rules from today but then did 6 study smart questions on Offer and Acceptance and got just about all of them wrong. In a rage I decided to do the first question set in RP. Bad fucking decision. Can anyone give me a boost?

[ellewoods123]

I'm 95% sure the following Barbri question for today is wrong. Set2Question8 of today's property set.

It says O conveyed a land to a veterinarian, but if the property is used for any other purpose, it is to go to the American Cancer Society.

American Cancer Society executory interest is void because of REA. Therefore what remains is: "O conveyed a land to a veterinarian, but if the property is used for any other purpose" In this case, this fee simple determinable would simply read "from O to A" and A would hold in fee simple absolute. Had the conveyance been "so long as the property..." then the fee simple determinable remains and the grantor gets a possibility of reverter. (I quote a book on this stuff below)

Well, Barbri's right answer says the friend must have joined the sale of land because the friend had a possibility of reverter (the vet attempted to sell the land in Fee simple absolute and later refused, a buyer sued for specific performance). But everything points to the conclusion that the vet actually had the land in fee simple absolute.

"For example, if the void future interest is struck from the conveyance 'to A, but if the property is used to sell alcoholic beverages, to B" the grant will simply read 'to A' and A will hold in fee simple absolute. On the other hand, if the conveyance reads 'To A, so long as the property is not used to sell alcoholic beverages, then to B' only the phrase 'then to B' would be struck; A will still have a fee simple determinable but the grantor will take a possibility of reverter[.]"

Am I right?

Sounds right to me

You are right based on your example but the question actually says "for so long as the property is used as an animal shelter, BUT IF..then to (void future interest interest". - as opposed to "to the vet, but if".

So when I read the explanation I just assumed you strike it all the way through and you are left with "for so long as the property is used for an animal shelter" in which case as you said O has a possibility of reverter.

Could be wrong and chime in if I'm confused but that's how I interpreted it. The question threw me off too

[mvp99]

I'm 95% sure the following Barbri question for today is wrong. Set2Question8 of today's property set.

It says O conveyed a land to a veterinarian, but if the property is used for any other purpose, it is to go to the American Cancer Society.

American Cancer Society executory interest is void because of REA. Therefore what remains is: "O conveyed a land to a veterinarian, but if the property is used for any other purpose" In this case, this fee simple determinable would simply read "from O to A" and A would hold in fee simple absolute. Had the conveyance been "so long as the property..." then the fee simple determinable remains and the grantor gets a possibility of reverter. (I quote a book on this stuff below)

Well, Barbri's right answer says the friend must have joined the sale of land because the friend had a possibility of reverter (the vet attempted to sell the land in Fee simple absolute and later refused, a buyer sued for specific performance). But everything points to the conclusion that the vet actually had the land in fee simple absolute.

"For example, if the void future interest is struck from the conveyance 'to A, but if the property is used to sell alcoholic beverages, to B" the grant will simply read 'to A' and A will hold in fee simple absolute. On the other hand, if the conveyance reads 'To A, so long as the property is not used to sell alcoholic beverages, then to B' only the phrase 'then to B' would be struck; A will still have a fee simple determinable but the grantor will take a possibility of reverter[.]"

Am I right?

Sounds right to me

You are right based on your example but the question actually says "for so long as the property is used as an animal shelter, BUT IF..then to (void future interest interest". - as opposed to "to the vet, but if".

So when I read the explanation I just assumed you strike it all the way through and you are left with "for so long as the property is used for an animal shelter" in which case as you said O has a possibility of reverter.

Could be wrong and chime in if I'm confused but that's how I interpreted it. The question threw me off too

What you say makes sense although I would like to know the rules for striking out conditions... or not.. at this point it I don't think it's worth it.. it is what it is

[ellewoods123]

I'm 95% sure the following Barbri question for today is wrong. Set2Question8 of today's property set.

It says O conveyed a land to a veterinarian, but if the property is used for any other purpose, it is to go to the American Cancer Society.

American Cancer Society executory interest is void because of REA. Therefore what remains is: "O conveyed a land to a veterinarian, but if the property is used for any other purpose" In this case, this fee simple determinable would simply read "from O to A" and A would hold in fee simple absolute. Had the conveyance been "so long as the property..." then the fee simple determinable remains and the grantor gets a possibility of reverter. (I quote a book on this stuff below)

Well, Barbri's right answer says the friend must have joined the sale of land because the friend had a possibility of reverter (the vet attempted to sell the land in Fee simple absolute and later refused, a buyer sued for specific performance). But everything points to the conclusion that the vet actually had the land in fee simple absolute.

"For example, if the void future interest is struck from the conveyance 'to A, but if the property is used to sell alcoholic beverages, to B" the grant will simply read 'to A' and A will hold in fee simple absolute. On the other hand, if the conveyance reads 'To A, so long as the property is not used to sell alcoholic beverages, then to B' only the phrase 'then to B' would be struck; A will still have a fee simple determinable but the grantor will take a possibility of reverter[.]"

Am I right?

Sounds right to me

You are right based on your example but the question actually says "for so long as the property is used as an animal shelter, BUT IF..then to (void future interest interest". - as opposed to "to the vet, but if".

So when I read the explanation I just assumed you strike it all the way through and you are left with "for so long as the property is used for an animal shelter" in which case as you said O has a possibility of reverter.

Could be wrong and chime in if I'm confused but that's how I interpreted it. The question threw me off too

What you say makes sense although I would like to know the rules for striking out conditions... or not.. at this point it I don't think it's worth it.. it is what it is

The CMR briefly mentions a "non-grammatical" clause rule, which basically just says that you strike as much of the clause as is necessary to make the clause grammatically correct. Apparently the bar exam is a grammar test too.

[Redfactor]

Also, I was wondering if people are noticing a substantial difference in how they're scoring on Barbri MCQs versus how they're scoring on Adaptibar MPQs. I know that Barbri questions are significantly harder, but I find myself scoring very close to the supposed average on Barbri questions but substantially above average on Adaptibar (in the 70-75 percent range). Should I be taking anything from this?

Same here.

My program started later than yours, so it sounds like I am behind most of y'all.

I've only covered Torts, Con Law, and Criminal Law/Pro for the MBE portions. Of those, my raw scores are ~20-25% higher on Adaptibar than Barbri.

As best as I can figure it, many Barbri questions provide enough facts to decide two issues of law. Thus, half the problem is identifying which is being tested. (Thus reinforcing the "read the stem first" approach for the call of the question.) On Adaptibar questions, I can generally start with the stimulus and get a pretty good feel for what the question will be and the right answer. I cannot do that with Barbri questions. I have to read the stem first or I will have to go back and reread portions of the stimulus.

Ultimately, I feel the effect is just longer, convoluted question stimuli. However, Barbri's questions are forcing me to change my test taking ways -- hopefully for the better.

And I will say that I do learn a lot by going over the Barbri questions I got wrong. Even if I end up thinking the question is unnecessarily stupid-hard, it forces me to engage with the material on a pretty deep level. I actually attribute much of my high Adaptibar scores to the post-question work I put into my Barbri questions.

[fauxpsych]

Hi everyone. When do we get the feedback from the first submitted essay? I only ask because I see another one due this thursday.

Am I just not seeing where they post it?

EDIT: LoL, Just got an email stating it was graded.

[LionelHutzJD]

Hi everyone. When do we get the feedback from the first submitted essay? I only ask because I see another one due this thursday.

Am I just not seeing where they post it?

EDIT: LoL, Just got an email stating it was graded.

I'm curious what scores they've given out on the first essay.

[sflyr2016]

they gave me and everyone i've spoken to a "just below passing" on the essays. I'm sure it's a tactic, but it's annoying. also, does anyone really write their essays out like they do? they not only discuss the most remote issues in a fact pattern, but regurgitate a treatise whenever possible. i doubt any grader is actually looking for what barbri claims they're looking for; at least in law school, this essay-writing style would have hurt rather than helped on exams.

(this if for Florida, though. fwiw)

[ellewoods123]

i got the torts essay back. i got a 4. but i didn't do it timed, so not really sure it matters.

[sublime]

Haven't gotten mine back yet.

[LionelHutzJD]

I did it timed and not really open book. Got a 3 with remarks saying "this is a pretty good first essay" Ok....

[WahooLaw24]

they gave me and everyone i've spoken to a "just below passing" on the essays. I'm sure it's a tactic, but it's annoying. also, does anyone really write their essays out like they do? they not only discuss the most remote issues in a fact pattern, but regurgitate a treatise whenever possible. i doubt any grader is actually looking for what barbri claims they're looking for; at least in law school, this essay-writing style would have hurt rather than helped on exams.

I do find the model essays a little intimidating. Some of them are simply not possible to get down onto the page in the 20 minutes they recommend you write, even if you know the law cold. That being said, they're just meant to teach you the law and represent a perfect answer, not an average passing one.

[fauxpsych]

Hi everyone. When do we get the feedback from the first submitted essay? I only ask because I see another one due this thursday.

Am I just not seeing where they post it?

EDIT: LoL, Just got an email stating it was graded.

I'm curious what scores they've given out on the first essay.

I did mine timed and open book and got a 4 and "nicely done". Some decent tips as to where to expand my application section as I only really mentioned zone of apprehension in passing.

Given my Multiple Choice scores, I'm not looking forward to the closed book crim essay due this week.

[Br3v]

Has anyone done some of the MPTs (the thing where you get the case law and statutes, etc and write a memo/etc)?

I know it says we should outline, do you think its ok to leave that outline in the same word document our completed essay is on? I ask because first of all, I don't know where else I would write the outline/notes. Second, I feel that deleting the outline right before I submit might mean I delete some bullet point that never made it into my final essay, thus depriving me of an opportunity to get at least some credit for it.

[WahooLaw24]

If you're talking about on the actual exam, definitely don't do that. If you just mean for submitting a sample to Barbri it's obviously way less important.

If you want to type the outline into the document, just delete along the way as you actually write out the content.

[Br3v]

If you're talking about on the actual exam, definitely don't do that. If you just mean for submitting a sample to Barbri it's obviously way less important.

If you want to type the outline into the document, just delete along the way as you actually write out the content.

What makes you say definitely don't do that?

[WahooLaw24]

If you're talking about on the actual exam, definitely don't do that. If you just mean for submitting a sample to Barbri it's obviously way less important.

If you want to type the outline into the document, just delete along the way as you actually write out the content.

What makes you say definitely don't do that?

Someone else can confirm, but we're supposed to be submitting a final, formal written work product to the graders, and I don't think they want to see our notes at the bottom. I'm in the same boat as you though so someone with more knowledge please join in!

[Br3v]

If you're talking about on the actual exam, definitely don't do that. If you just mean for submitting a sample to Barbri it's obviously way less important.

If you want to type the outline into the document, just delete along the way as you actually write out the content.

What makes you say definitely don't do that?

Someone else can confirm, but we're supposed to be submitting a final, formal written work product to the graders, and I don't think they want to see our notes at the bottom. I'm in the same boat as you though so someone with more knowledge please join in!

I just don't see how it could hurt besides making the grader think you were being unorginized (ironically, by being organized).

[WahooLaw24]

If you're talking about on the actual exam, definitely don't do that. If you just mean for submitting a sample to Barbri it's obviously way less important.

If you want to type the outline into the document, just delete along the way as you actually write out the content.

What makes you say definitely don't do that?

Someone else can confirm, but we're supposed to be submitting a final, formal written work product to the graders, and I don't think they want to see our notes at the bottom. I'm in the same boat as you though so someone with more knowledge please join in!

I just don't see how it could hurt besides making the grader think you were being unorginized (ironically, by being organized).

Maybe. I got the sense our score was partially based on organization and following the specific directions. So if the prompt is to write a letter to the client they want to see whether what we submit looks fit for a client. Maybe they'd let it slide.

[learntolift]

somehow my raw score, as stated by my PSP chart, for Crim law/pro is 72.2% but it then shows me in the 38th percentile.

So are you all just wrecking crim and getting 90% on the studysmart problem sets?

[sublime]

somehow my raw score, as stated by my PSP chart, for Crim law/pro is 72.2% but it then shows me in the 38th percentile.

So are you all just wrecking crim and getting 90% on the studysmart problem sets?

It may be that they don't update percentiles until Monday afaik, if you have done some recently.

[LionelHutzJD]

I have a question that appeared in a fact pattern in the Criminal Law workshop.

Police have a valid arrest warrant for X. Police receive a call that X is at Friends house, F. The police arrive at the house and see X's car parked outside. Police knock on F's door and F answers, police asks if X is there, F says no he is not. Police push through, find X and place him under arrest and conduct a search incident to arrest. They find a metal box, open it and find cocaine.

How is it that the police can enter the house of F without consent and without a search warrant to look for X?

Thank you.

[sublime]

I have a question that appeared in a fact pattern in the Criminal Law workshop.

Police have a valid arrest warrant for X. Police receive a call that X is at Friends house, F. The police arrive at the house and see X's car parked outside. Police knock on F's door and F answers, police asks if X is there, F says no he is not. Police push through, find X and place him under arrest and conduct a search incident to arrest. They find a metal box, open it and find cocaine.

How is it that the police can enter the house of F without consent and without a search warrant to look for X?

Thank you.

My understanding was that they couldn't, but Idk.