Barbri paced program question? Forum

[turquoiseturtle]

From the NCBE set posted:

#10: Why would the covenant in the pharmacist's lease be fairly construed as to apply only to the original shopping center premises? Doesn't it touch and concern the land?
#15: is the answer "D" because the call of the question never asks for a contract remedy, just whether the builder could prevail in his suit (meaning it could be in equity)?
#17: I picked A because I didn't think it discriminated if it allowed families to rent buildings without balconies.

#10: Yes, it does, as to that piece of land, but the issue is that the owner was buying an adjacent piece of land and combining it to create a single parcel. Since the original covenant was written with a description of the original shopping center by metes and bounds, it doesn't make a lot of sense that that covenant could apply to a piece of land or an expanded shopping center that wasn't even in contemplation when the covenant was originally formed.

#15: There is discussion about this above. What people seem to think is that a tornado is an unexpected, unforeseen risk, so a good faith modification of the contract will be upheld. That seems to be the only thing that makes sense to me. I don't know what other factors go into deciding that it is "fair and equitable".

#17: It still discriminates. Think about it like this: what if it said that they could only rent out balconied condos to people that were white? Civil Rights act of 1968 (Fair Housing Act) includes families with children as a protected class that you cannot discriminate against in terms of housing. Treat it like a segregation based on race.

(Some might argue: it's not the same, because there is a legitimate concern for the safety of minor children, that wouldn't be present in a race or gender-based discrimination. Doesn't matter. It came about because people were reluctant to rent out to families because they anticipated higher repair/upkeep costs with children messing things up)

I guessed lucky with #17 based on what seemed most "right/fair" to me, but did Barbri teach us anything at all about the Fair Housing Act? It seems like this question is totally dependent on knowing the FHA. If this question had just been based on equal protection, it would seem to me like it would be fine because families with young children aren't protected and also its a private action.

[jd20132013]

Just bombed the Barbri simulated final MBE. Ugh. Screwed.

Staying confident is half the battle! Don't give up!

Granted, I did bomb the midterm. I bombed this exam too not as badly, but still pretty shitty.

so you're improving still. and you have a week. so you can get to mediocre in 7 days if you just keep doing what you've been doing. let's get it.

[jaydizzle]

Just bombed the Barbri simulated final MBE. Ugh. Screwed.

Staying confident is half the battle! Don't give up!

Granted, I did bomb the midterm. I bombed this exam too not as badly, but still pretty shitty.

so you're improving still. and you have a week. so you can get to mediocre in 7 days if you just keep doing what you've been doing. let's get it.

I don't know if it's just Barbri that's screwing around with my head or what. I do fine on some of the sets. I did fine on the Mixed Set 1 I did with 50 questions. I got 70% of them correct.

[The Egyptian]

What would you focus on at that time, if you scored exactly 50% in practicing both essays, and mbe?

We are talking big apple here

[mvpforme]

Just bombed the Barbri simulated final MBE. Ugh. Screwed.

Staying confident is half the battle! Don't give up!

Granted, I did bomb the midterm. I bombed this exam too not as badly, but still pretty shitty.

so you're improving still. and you have a week. so you can get to mediocre in 7 days if you just keep doing what you've been doing. let's get it.

Also keep in mind Barbri's questions are more difficult than the NCBE's (as are, I think based on the Qs I purchased from the NCBE, those NCBE questions posted earlier in this thread). Though often repeated, you can take some comfort in that fact. Keep pushing. It is a four-quarter game.

[jd20132013]

What would you focus on at that time, if you scored exactly 50% in practicing both essays, and mbe?

We are talking big apple here

mbe and it isnt even close

if youre at median on essays you know everything you need to know to pass and the reward for learning more is a lot lower than learning more mbe

[MoneyMay]

Keep pushing guys... this is when it gets really tough (I'm absolutely exhausted, if I laid down I would pass out as soon as my head hit the pillow) but we all worked too hard to give up now.

We had to take the SATs and do well in high school to get to college, then in college we had to do well there and then study for and do well on the LSAT, and then we just went through 3 years of misery but we are almost there. Lets get it.

[Law-So-Hard]

Keep pushing guys... this is when it gets really tough (I'm absolutely exhausted, if I laid down I would pass out as soon as my head hit the pillow) but we all worked too hard to give up now.

We had to take the SATs and do well in high school to get to college, then in college we had to do well there and then study for and do well on the LSAT, and then we just went through 3 years of misery but we are almost there. Lets get it.

This. If you've been preparing for the last couple months and doing a decent effort you have to trust the time you put in and the knowledge you gained. So much of it is just the mental strength to keep going now.

[At the Drive-In]

What would you focus on at that time, if you scored exactly 50% in practicing both essays, and mbe?

We are talking big apple here

I'm not from NY and don't know all the nuances of that bar exam, but it's probably easier to improve your MBE score by a few %ile than it is essays regardless of your state. Now if New York weights the MBE really low, like 30% or something, focus on essays, but if it's 40%+ I'd focus on the MBE.

[plath]

Idk if you've seen this, but...I took this NCBE bit. Some of the stuff seemed a little odd. Some looked like standard barbri stuff/10 was actually a case I read in sales. lol. 18 real MBE questions with an answer key. No explanations though. --LinkRemoved--

Get familiar with those mbe qs. There are right on the money

11/18. Want to die.
Can anyone who got the following questions right please share his/her thinking process ?

#3: WTF where is that answer from
#10: I just don't get why is B wrong?
#11: picked c. why is strict scrutiny applied if it's a content neutral restriction? ("all" political candidates)
#12: where is the law in answer b taken from?


FML. this honestly crushed me.

[turquoiseturtle]

Idk if you've seen this, but...I took this NCBE bit. Some of the stuff seemed a little odd. Some looked like standard barbri stuff/10 was actually a case I read in sales. lol. 18 real MBE questions with an answer key. No explanations though. --LinkRemoved--

Get familiar with those mbe qs. There are right on the money

11/18. Want to die.
Can anyone who got the following questions right please share his/her thinking process ?

#3: WTF where is that answer from
#10: I just don't get why is B wrong?
#11: picked c. why is strict scrutiny applied if it's a content neutral restriction? ("all" political candidates)
#12: where is the law in answer b taken from?


FML. this honestly crushed me.

#10. I have no idea.
#11. "All" political candidates is not content neutral. The content is political versus music posters or whatever. It's actually viewpoint neutral because its restricting all politicians, not just some politicians. Also, the idea that there are certain channels left open, isn't really involved in the applicable test, even if this was a content neutral restriction (i.e. no posters at all in barbershops). If it was a content neutral regulation, the test would be if it is (i) viewpoint neutral and (ii) reasonably related to a legit gov't purpose. The alternative channels only comes in when it is a public forum or designated public forum, which I don't think these barbershops count as, despite being state licensed.

#3 and and #12 I just picked what seemed "right." I strongly disagree with the idea that these questions are easier than Barbri's. They are shorter, but I guessed lot.

[plath]

#11. "All" political candidates is not content neutral. The content is political versus music posters or whatever. It's actually viewpoint neutral because its restricting all politicians, not just some politicians. Also, the idea that there are certain channels left open, isn't really involved in the applicable test, where this actually a content neutral restriction (i.e. no posters at all in barbershops). If that were the regulation, the test would be viewpoint neutral and reasonably related to a legit gov't purpose. The alternative channels only comes in when it is a public forum or designated public forum, which I don't think these barbershops count as, despite being state licensed.

Thanks. But still - as long as it is viewpoint neutral how come SS is applied?

[encore1101]

Idk if you've seen this, but...I took this NCBE bit. Some of the stuff seemed a little odd. Some looked like standard barbri stuff/10 was actually a case I read in sales. lol. 18 real MBE questions with an answer key. No explanations though. --LinkRemoved--

Get familiar with those mbe qs. There are right on the money

11/18. Want to die.
Can anyone who got the following questions right please share his/her thinking process ?

#3: WTF where is that answer from
#10: I just don't get why is B wrong?
#11: picked c. why is strict scrutiny applied if it's a content neutral restriction? ("all" political candidates)
#12: where is the law in answer b taken from?


FML. this honestly crushed me.

3. B can be eliminated because 10th Amendment is rarely the answer. C can be eliminated because publicly funded education is not a fundamental right. Between A and D, I thought A sounded a little ridiculous, so I went with D.

10. The question says that the owner "would not lease any part of the shopping center to another drugstore," and the lease agreement went into detail describing contours of what is the "shopping center."

11. is not content-neutral; its content-based. The law lets barber shops advertise anything else -- movies, video games, fast food, etc., but singles out one particular topic that cannot be displayed (political speech). Content-neutral means that the subject matter of the speech doesn't matter. You're thinking of "view-point neutral," if the government said "Nobody can put up posters against the minority party, but the majority party is okay."

12. Never heard of it, but its in Rule 615 of the Federal Rules of Evidence.

[turquoiseturtle]

Thanks. But still - as long as it is viewpoint neutral how come SS is applied?

Because you apply strict scrutiny when the regulation is not content neutral. It doesn't matter if it's viewpoint neutral, its not content neutral. A regulation can not be content neutral in two ways: either its not viewpoint neutral or its not subject matter neutral (I actually don't think it could be both, because if it isn't subject matter neutral, its necessarily banning all viewpoints). In this case, the regulation is viewpoint neutral, but its limiting just one subject matter (political ads) resulting in it not being content neutral.

[beachbum]

For #3 (from written SFE explanations): An individual has a fundamental right to travel from state to state, and a state law that is designed to deter persons from moving into the state is likely to violate the Equal Protection Clause. When a state uses a durational requirement (waiting period) for dispensing benefits, that requirement is normally subject to strict scrutiny.

Basically, it violates the right to travel, which is a fundamental right (strict scrutiny) protected by the Equal Protection Clause. There's also a specific case that basically says funding programs like this that carry waiting periods are never ok. I'd say just remember that rule.

Also, I feel dumb, but can someone just give me a quick rule statement on #1? Is it just that if you present evidence sufficient to raise a defense, you're entitled to the jury instruction? (But I thought this dude's evidence wasn't sufficient, given that he was afraid of being beaten - is that serious bodily injury? - and he blew the guy away with deadly force?)

And can someone explain 16 to me? I feel like I'm over-thinking this one. I thought this was a 6th amendment confrontation problem and went with D.

[encore1101]

[quote="plath"][/quote]


Strict Scrutiny is applied when its content-based restriction, i.e. either subject-matter restrictions (speech is restricted based on the contents), or view-point restrictions.

[turquoiseturtle]

3. B can be eliminated because 10th Amendment is rarely the answer. C can be eliminated because publicly funded education is not a fundamental right. Between A and D, I thought A sounded a little ridiculous, so I went with D.

10. The question says that the owner "would not lease any part of the shopping center to another drugstore," and the lease agreement went into detail describing contours of what is the "shopping center."

11. is not content-neutral; its content-based. The law lets barber shops advertise anything else -- movies, video games, fast food, etc., but singles out one particular topic that cannot be displayed (political speech). Content-neutral means that the subject matter of the speech doesn't matter. You're thinking of "view-point neutral," if the government said "Nobody can put up posters against the minority party, but the majority party is okay."

12. Never heard of it, but its in Rule 615 of the Federal Rules of Evidence.

Also, with regard to #3. I'd say that, very generally, durational requirements are frequently invalid unless they're pretty short. 1 year is a long time. There are cases allowing 30-60 day waits to vote for registration and administrative purposes. But I would be wary of durational residency requirements being constitutional. There are all those cases about welfare/public benefits and how states can't have durations for those. I'd put this in the same category.

[turquoiseturtle]

For #3 (from written SFE explanations): An individual has a fundamental right to travel from state to state, and a state law that is designed to deter persons from moving into the state is likely to violate the Equal Protection Clause. When a state uses a durational requirement (waiting period) for dispensing benefits, that requirement is normally subject to strict scrutiny.

Basically, it violates the right to travel, which is a fundamental right (strict scrutiny) protected by the Equal Protection Clause. There's also a specific case that basically says funding programs like this that carry waiting periods are never ok. I'd say just remember that rule.

Also, I feel dumb, but can someone just give me a quick rule statement on #1? Is it just that if you present evidence sufficient to raise a defense, you're entitled to the jury instruction? (But I thought this dude's evidence wasn't sufficient, given that he was afraid of being beaten - is that serious bodily injury? - and he blew the guy away with deadly force?)

And can someone explain 16 to me? I feel like I'm over-thinking this one. I thought this was a 6th amendment confrontation problem and went with D.

I thought the same for #1 and got it wrong. Making obscene remarks to me doesn't equal getting beaten later. But I think you're right, that you're entitled to the jury instruction because maybe the jury thinks that it is sufficient. Basically we jumped to what the jury would decide, but the question was whether the jury should be allowed to decide. And its least its arguable that it is sufficient. He might not have been entitled to the instruction when his son had never beaten him before and was on the stoop talking about puppies and kittens and rainbows.

The answer to number 16 is discussed a bit earlier. But theres no 6th Amendment problem because the person who made the statement is a witness. Thus, defendant can confront the witness.

[peanut123]

fuck fuck fuck fuck. I just got 9/18 on this ncbe thing and have been working the half day exam in sets of 25 and have gotten 29/50 right so far. What the actual fuck am I supposed to do now?

[At the Drive-In]

11/18. Want to die.


FML. this honestly crushed me.

11/18 seems worse than it is. Scaled up to 200, that's ~122 raw. This is also a small sample size, and they intentionally asked stuff that is obscure on that set, probably because they want to scare you.

[Law-So-Hard]

fuck fuck fuck fuck. I just got 9/18 on this ncbe thing and have been working the half day exam in sets of 25 and have gotten 29/50 right so far. What the actual fuck am I supposed to do now?

You got 9 right. Make sure you got them right for the proper reasons. The 9 you got wrong - why? Appreciate the 8 days you have to connect the dots in your knowledge and get it right. Stay calm, if you panic your brain will shut down and won't be useful to you. You know this, you can do it.
(I'm kind of speaking to both of us here, the MBE set had a touch of dafuq for me)

[plath]

11/18. Want to die.


FML. this honestly crushed me.

11/18 seems worse than it is. Scaled up to 200, that's ~122 raw. This is also a small sample size, and they intentionally asked stuff that is obscure on that set, probably because they want to scare you.

Thank you for that.

And thank to all the others who cleared up some of the answers.

[encore1101]

do what i did and follow prof. franseze on twitter. yesterday's gem "Emotions follow your rhetoric-Instead of 'I am sick of this' try 'I am on the edge of glory-I've earned the right to be here-I've got this'"

[The Egyptian]

fuck fuck fuck fuck. I just got 9/18 on this ncbe thing and have been working the half day exam in sets of 25 and have gotten 29/50 right so far. What the actual fuck am I supposed to do now?

You got 9 right. Make sure you got them right for the proper reasons. The 9 you got wrong - why? Appreciate the 8 days you have to connect the dots in your knowledge and get it right. Stay calm, if you panic your brain will shut down and won't be useful to you. You know this, you can do it.
(I'm kind of speaking to both of us here, the MBE set had a touch of dafuq for me)

Where is that test?

[turquoiseturtle]

fuck fuck fuck fuck. I just got 9/18 on this ncbe thing and have been working the half day exam in sets of 25 and have gotten 29/50 right so far. What the actual fuck am I supposed to do now?

You got 9 right. Make sure you got them right for the proper reasons. The 9 you got wrong - why? Appreciate the 8 days you have to connect the dots in your knowledge and get it right. Stay calm, if you panic your brain will shut down and won't be useful to you. You know this, you can do it.
(I'm kind of speaking to both of us here, the MBE set had a touch of dafuq for me)

Where is that test?

Linked to earlier. --LinkRemoved--