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

[LionelHutzJD]

Quick kind of random question. For Full Faith and Credit, is a judgment that is being appealed a final judgment? I think the answer is that it's not, and that's what it also says in my lecture notes, but I can't actually find that anywhere else other than my lecture notes, so I wanted to confirm.

I actually thought the opposite..I had this rule in my missed rule statements document:

1. ENFORCEMENT OF JUDGMENTS DURING PENDING POST-TRIAL MOTIONS – judgments are enforceable during pending post trial motions unless the court otherwise orders

am I confused?

Judgments are enforceable pending appeal.

Yes but no judge would grant Full Faith and Credit to a Judgment that is pending appeal.

are we sure about this?

Absolutely. Let's say you have a Judgment in State A and we know State courts almost always give a litigant a right to appeal. It would work an injustice if the winning litigant in State A were to take the judgment and enforce it in State B - completely eviscerating the losing litigants right to appeal.

but isn't the determinative factor as to whether a judgment is final for purposes of FF and C whether the trial court has anything left to do on the case? You can obviously appeal a final judgment of trial court but during the pendency of appeal all judgments are enforceable in the meantime so it would seem to me that if there is a final judgment in State A, State B must enforce that judgment UNLESS AND UNTIL the appellate court actually reverses. Not at all trying to be argumentative just genuinely confused lol so if you have insight to clarify my confusion please share!

No, because finality = no further appeals may be taken. And FFC only applies to FINAL judgments (no further appeals may be taken)

[SLS_AMG]

For those who have done OPEs, these are questions from actual exams, right? I keep seeing conflicting reports that they're "way easier" than actual MBE questions, but I don't see how that's the case if, for example, the most recent one was taken from the 2013 exam. Not every question was easy by any stretch, but it didn't seem impossible like people say when they walk out of the exam and post on here. Is that just the effect of stress or have the questions changed significantly since 2013?

[WahooLaw24]

For those who have done OPEs, these are questions from actual exams, right? I keep seeing conflicting reports that they're "way easier" than actual MBE questions, but I don't see how that's the case if, for example, the most recent one was taken from the 2013 exam. Not every question was easy by any stretch, but it didn't seem impossible like people say when they walk out of the exam and post on here. Is that just the effect of stress or have the questions changed significantly since 2013?

Also wondering this. What I think is most likely is that they're real and that the questions haven't changed, but what stresses people a lot during the exam is (1) having no idea how to answer the experimental questions, (2) being torn on a number of questions that ultimately get thrown out anyway for one reason or another, etc. Those questions probably wouldn't make it into an OPE, so I think what we're seeing is real but slightly easier than the actual exam appears on test day, and obviously less pressure. They're also only giving 100 questions out, so it's possible it is a slightly easier subset.

[LionelHutzJD]

I took OPE-4 which are actual questions from 2013. I thought the wording of the questions were a little bit off from Barbri style of questions, so in that regard i'm glad I took it.I didn't find it any easier or any harder though. I think people walk out stressed on test day because they generally only remember the more difficult questions.

[MCFC]

Today's Civil Procedure Essay.

[+] Spoiler

On the motion for a new trial (point #3 in the essay), their explanation makes sense.

But I swear we just had a Civ Pro MBE question in the last week or two where a judge granted a new trial because he thought the jury had made a wrong call. I remember because I got it wrong. Am I nuts?

e: Found it, #182 on the Simulated MBE.

The correct answer is (C). The judge should grant a new trial. One of the grounds for granting a new trial is when the verdict is contrary to the law or to the weight of the evidence. Because the weight of the evidence appears to favor the defendant doctor, an order for new trial is appropriate.
--
Compare that to the essay answer's requirement that there be a "clear miscarriage of justice."

[WheatThins]

Anyone know the goal or the averages for tomorrow's 100 Q MBE refresher?

56/100.

Really? Where'd you find this? Just finished it...56 seems awfully low.

its in the front of the big MPQ book. I also finished it today and got 55/100. I thought it was really hard.

I thought the MBE Refresher set was probably the hardest set in the book. Not impossible or even unfair by any means, but pretty challenging (as evidenced by the comparatively low average score, which is even lower than the "Midterm" they hyped so much).

I bombed conlaw, 5/14, but thought the other subjects were ok. I guess not too many really easy questions tho.

[Itwasluck]

Today's Civil Procedure Essay.

[+] Spoiler

On the motion for a new trial (point #3 in the essay), their explanation makes sense.

But I swear we just had a Civ Pro MBE question in the last week or two where a judge granted a new trial because he thought the jury had made a wrong call. I remember because I got it wrong. Am I nuts?

e: Found it, #182 on the Simulated MBE.

The correct answer is (C). The judge should grant a new trial. One of the grounds for granting a new trial is when the verdict is contrary to the law or to the weight of the evidence. Because the weight of the evidence appears to favor the defendant doctor, an order for new trial is appropriate.
--
Compare that to the essay answer's requirement that there be a "clear miscarriage of justice."

Absolutely infuriating. I had the exact same thought. Barbri's plan is to make me get both wrong. It worked.

[MCFC]

Family Law Essay

[+] Spoiler

Not questioning the law (because I don't know anything), but seems kind of crazy to me to award sole custody on these facts.

Am I a closet MRA?

[LionelHutzJD]

Family Law Essay

[+] Spoiler

Not questioning the law (because I don't know anything), but seems kind of crazy to me to award sole custody on these facts.

Am I a closet MRA?

[+] Spoiler

I have no clue how the model answers came out with sole custody on this one. No facts indicate that the father was unfit. No facts indicate any kind of abuse.

[mvp99]

Family Law Essay

[+] Spoiler

Not questioning the law (because I don't know anything), but seems kind of crazy to me to award sole custody on these facts.

Am I a closet MRA?

I agree, its a random conclusion

[mvp99]

Today's Civil Procedure Essay.

[+] Spoiler

On the motion for a new trial (point #3 in the essay), their explanation makes sense.

But I swear we just had a Civ Pro MBE question in the last week or two where a judge granted a new trial because he thought the jury had made a wrong call. I remember because I got it wrong. Am I nuts?

e: Found it, #182 on the Simulated MBE.

The correct answer is (C). The judge should grant a new trial. One of the grounds for granting a new trial is when the verdict is contrary to the law or to the weight of the evidence. Because the weight of the evidence appears to favor the defendant doctor, an order for new trial is appropriate.
--
Compare that to the essay answer's requirement that there be a "clear miscarriage of justice."

[+] Spoiler

I thought that the party's argument failed because its not the standard (here is against the weight of the evidence). Then I went on to address the judge's perception of the trial. I didn't say anything about miscarriage of justice. I ultimately concluded no b/c judge shouldnt be granting new trial without a bit more. Its more a policy thing than law. I think of the weight of the evidence as a standard thats just below JMOL sufficiency of evidence. There was sufficient evidence but, had the jury properly considered the evidence, 9 out of 10 wouldve come out differently. If I remember correctly, the outline answer is missing this policy argument but it hints at it by saying something like "technically, the judge can do X but"

[Br3v]

Today's Civil Procedure Essay.

[+] Spoiler

On the motion for a new trial (point #3 in the essay), their explanation makes sense.

But I swear we just had a Civ Pro MBE question in the last week or two where a judge granted a new trial because he thought the jury had made a wrong call. I remember because I got it wrong. Am I nuts?

e: Found it, #182 on the Simulated MBE.

The correct answer is (C). The judge should grant a new trial. One of the grounds for granting a new trial is when the verdict is contrary to the law or to the weight of the evidence. Because the weight of the evidence appears to favor the defendant doctor, an order for new trial is appropriate.
--
Compare that to the essay answer's requirement that there be a "clear miscarriage of justice."

Absolutely infuriating. I had the exact same thought. Barbri's plan is to make me get both wrong. It worked.

Had the exact same thought! I think I remember learning in law school that it's more than just the judge's opinion (obviously) so I am going to go with the tougher standard they outlined in the essay today

[mvp99]

Today's Civil Procedure Essay.

[+] Spoiler

On the motion for a new trial (point #3 in the essay), their explanation makes sense.

But I swear we just had a Civ Pro MBE question in the last week or two where a judge granted a new trial because he thought the jury had made a wrong call. I remember because I got it wrong. Am I nuts?

e: Found it, #182 on the Simulated MBE.

The correct answer is (C). The judge should grant a new trial. One of the grounds for granting a new trial is when the verdict is contrary to the law or to the weight of the evidence. Because the weight of the evidence appears to favor the defendant doctor, an order for new trial is appropriate.
--
Compare that to the essay answer's requirement that there be a "clear miscarriage of justice."

Absolutely infuriating. I had the exact same thought. Barbri's plan is to make me get both wrong. It worked.

Had the exact same thought! I think I remember learning in law school that it's more than just the judge's opinion (obviously) so I am going to go with the tougher standard they outlined in the essay today

[+] Spoiler

weight of the evidence is a standard. TBH i think as long as you mention the standard they cant take off points for the conclusion. However I still think no new trial is the bsed on the phrasing of the judges opinion and pp argument.

[JoeySkoko]

anyone doing Emanuel's as well?

I did the last 30 questions of property and they were substantially harder than the first 15 (like went from 90% to 50%), anyone can relate or am I just brain dead?

Seems to be some types of questions that I hadn't come across in BarBri.

[goden]

anyone doing Emanuel's as well?

I did the last 30 questions of property and they were substantially harder than the first 15 (like went from 90% to 50%), anyone can relate or am I just brain dead?

Seems to be some types of questions that I hadn't come across in BarBri.

Agreed

There was also a string of like 5 in a row of future interests/RAP questions

[wwwcol]

Easy q that I'm a little confused about: does the court have to establish a factual basis before accepting a defendant's plea?

[mvp99]

Should I even bother with the MPT? Isn't is almost guaranteed we'll get a 4/5 if we follow instructions? There's another one scheduled for next week.

[sublime]

Should I even bother with the MPT? Isn't is almost guaranteed we'll get a 4/5 if we follow instructions? There's another one scheduled for next week.

I haven't decided if I am going to do it, since I am behind, but I will prob at least outline it.

[Br3v]

Should I even bother with the MPT? Isn't is almost guaranteed we'll get a 4/5 if we follow instructions? There's another one scheduled for next week.

I haven't decided if I am going to do it, since I am behind, but I will prob at least outline it.

I almost think outlining is not helpful, since it's a writing exercise. Unless you just want to make sure you can issue spot it, but I'm sure you can

[sublime]

Should I even bother with the MPT? Isn't is almost guaranteed we'll get a 4/5 if we follow instructions? There's another one scheduled for next week.

I haven't decided if I am going to do it, since I am behind, but I will prob at least outline it.

I almost think outlining is not helpful, since it's a writing exercise. Unless you just want to make sure you can issue spot it, but I'm sure you can

Yea, that's true. Although I think it still may have some value in just adding another data point in what they could ask/how to handle it.

[LionelHutzJD]

I actually did today's MPT (don't know why). I have no clue whether my answer is a 2 or a 4.

[milkisforbabies]

anyone doing Emanuel's as well?

I did the last 30 questions of property and they were substantially harder than the first 15 (like went from 90% to 50%), anyone can relate or am I just brain dead?

Seems to be some types of questions that I hadn't come across in BarBri.

Agreed

There was also a string of like 5 in a row of future interests/RAP questions

Yeah, the intro to the 50 property questions said they put all the future interests at the back (same with the UCC in their contracts section).

...which is why I also had a tough time on the last part.

[millieanon]

Question 24 on the Mixed Set 2...

[+] Spoiler

Call of the question - "Which of the following would be most important for deciding the CREDITOR'S action against the buyer for $5,000?"

I didn't choose D because I didn't think that the creditor, a non-party to the landowner-buyer contract would be able to reform the contract on the basis of the mutual mistake by the landowner and buyer.

In the answers it states that (B) was the wrong choice because "The parol evidence rule does not apply where a party to a written agreement alleges facts (e.g. mistake) that entitle him to reformation of the agreement.".... but the creditor is NOT a party to this agreement, so...? Or is a third party beneficiary considered a "party" and can therefore reform the contract?

Thanks

[mvp99]

LMFAO at in re clarke's model answer. Really? No way I could write all that, like literally, I cannot type that fast.

[ellewoods123]

LMFAO at in re clarke's model answer. Really? No way I could write all that, like literally, I cannot type that fast.

I'm actually really stressed about the MPT...mostly because I feel like I don't know how else to prepare for it. I've practiced enough to get a feel for time restraints but I don't know how else to prepare at this point..what are you guys doing? reading model answers?