Struggling on the MPT Portion - Any advice Forum

[SEngland]

I seem to have the MBE and MEE down but I am in struggle city on the MPT portion of this damn exam.

I have summered at a large firm and have no issue writing memos but I cannot seem to wrap my head around how to 1. Get this done in 90 minutes 2. How to approach the damn thing Stats first? Cases first? Files first? Barbri spent a few minutes on this but other sources say other things.

Also, how do you all go about outlining the answer and deciding what to do in terms of formulating your your outline?

I seem to be getting worse at these and have recently tried the grid method to no avail. Does anyone have any advice?

[bazinga!]

If you have the MBE and MEE "down" and are able to write a coherent memo I would not stress. Just be clear and make sure you finish.

[adonai]

Here is how I approach it:

1. Read the task memo
2. Immediately type the signature line, law firm heading, or court document name as appropriate for the PT so I don't forget later. Also helps me get into the groove.
2. Frame issues and make their headings. Usually they will also be provided in some document. Sometimes they are obvious, other times you have to dig for them. Sometimes you have to make your own if it is a client solution type PT (Client: "I want to do X without doing Y. What are my options?"). Those are the hardest for me since you don't really have anything to rely on.
3. Go through the cases and pull all the relevant rules and type them down under the appropriate heading. If you see the same law repeated over and over in the cases, that is a flag that it is important and must be used.
4. Make subissue headings under the main headings. As you continue to read the cases and pull more law, you'll find that you'll have to make subheadings for elements, exceptions, or elements of the elements. Insert appropriate law under the headings. It isn't uncommon to have like elements of elements of elements to analyze. Don't freak out because they're usually like a one sentence rule and a very short analysis.
5. Once you are satisfied with your structure, go back and read the substantive documents. At this point, I usually have about 1.5 to 1 hour left. One time I had only 30 min. left to do my analysis, and I panicked. But I found it was enough time since all I had to do was insert facts under the appropriate rule/heading.
6. Plug in the facts under the appropriate heading. If you need help analyzing, copy the analysis the courts use in the cases, altering party names and adjusting for context.
7. Conclude after every issue, subissue, element, and overall at the end.

There's no one way to organize a PT. Almost everyone's structure will be different. Sometimes you will have to read the substantive documents first before going into the library. It doesn't seem like that's usually the case though. That's why I always skim through a PT first to get a general feel of what I need to do first.

I don't make a separate outline on paper like barbri suggests we do. It is a waste of time. "Outline" on the computer by making your headings as you read the cases. If you are handwriting, I feel very bad for you...

[sidhesadie]

Here is how I approach it:

1. Read the task memo
2. Immediately type the signature line, law firm heading, or court document name as appropriate for the PT so I don't forget later. Also helps me get into the groove.
2. Frame issues and make their headings. Usually they will also be provided in some document. Sometimes they are obvious, other times you have to dig for them. Sometimes you have to make your own if it is a client solution type PT (Client: "I want to do X without doing Y. What are my options?"). Those are the hardest for me since you don't really have anything to rely on.
3. Go through the cases and pull all the relevant rules and type them down under the appropriate heading. If you see the same law repeated over and over in the cases, that is a flag that it is important and must be used.
4. Make subissue headings under the main headings. As you continue to read the cases and pull more law, you'll find that you'll have to make subheadings for elements, exceptions, or elements of the elements. Insert appropriate law under the headings. It isn't uncommon to have like elements of elements of elements to analyze. Don't freak out because they're usually like a one sentence rule and a very short analysis.
5. Once you are satisfied with your structure, go back and read the substantive documents. At this point, I usually have about 1.5 to 1 hour left. One time I had only 30 min. left to do my analysis, and I panicked. But I found it was enough time since all I had to do was insert facts under the appropriate rule/heading.
6. Plug in the facts under the appropriate heading. If you need help analyzing, copy the analysis the courts use in the cases, altering party names and adjusting for context.
7. Conclude after every issue, subissue, element, and overall at the end.

There's no one way to organize a PT. Almost everyone's structure will be different. Sometimes you will have to read the substantive documents first before going into the library. It doesn't seem like that's usually the case though. That's why I always skim through a PT first to get a general feel of what I need to do first.

I don't make a separate outline on paper like barbri suggests we do. It is a waste of time. "Outline" on the computer by making your headings as you read the cases. If you are handwriting, I feel very bad for you...

How do you have "1.5 to 1 hr left" when you only had 1.5 hrs to start with?

[s1m4]

^ CALI Pts are 3 hrs

[sidhesadie]

^ CALI Pts are 3 hrs

Ohhhh. Well that would change things. In my state (and based on the Op's question, I think their state) we have 90 minutes per MPT. 3 hrs of MPT total, but 2 in the timeframe, 90 minute limit for each. So we are trying to figure out how to do all of that in literally 1/2 the time that you are talking about using.

[whirledpeas86]

According to Themis, for a 90 minute MPT, you should follow these steps:

1. Read the task memo, being sure to note the relevant parties and the questions/issues you're supposed to address.
2. Read the format document and immediately write up the header so that you don't forget. Also write the questions you need to address at the top of where you're taking notes so you can keep that in mind the whole time you're working through the material.
3. Skip the case file and go directly to the case/statute file. Read through the statutes first and then the cases (even if they aren't in that order). Make notes and underline the stuff that seems relevant based on the facts from the task memo. You can usually start to outline at this point, paying particular attention to rules/tests that are important in the cases. Just make a sketchy outline of "the test for xyz requires 1. a, 2. b, and 3. c" leaving space after each step in the test.
4. Read through the case file and, in the outline of the test/rule, make notes of the relevant facts that apply to each step. Also keep in mind how the statutes apply to the facts of the case and make notes as necessary. By this point, you should have a mostly completed outline.
5. Put the finishing touches on your outline, making sure you have relevant facts from the case file to apply to each part of the test/rule from the cases and the statutory definitions. These first five steps should take you between 45-50 minutes. It seems like not that much time, but when you get in the habit of working systematically, each step flows pretty seamlessly into the next and you cut out a lot of wasted time worrying about where to go next.
6. Spend the last 45 minutes or so writing out the full memo/document, including all of the analysis and pieces of the document as described in the task memo.
7. Leave a couple minutes at the end to go back and make sure you formatted your document correctly, addressed every question you were supposed to address, and hit every part of the test as described in the relevant cases.

I know it seems like a lot, but I was super worried about the MPT initially and following this strategy has helped me feel WAY more at ease. Do a full, timed MPT once or twice following this and you'll really start to see it come together. Good luck!

[Duchovnysfan]

According to Themis, for a 90 minute MPT, you should follow these steps:

1. Read the task memo, being sure to note the relevant parties and the questions/issues you're supposed to address.
2. Read the format document and immediately write up the header so that you don't forget. Also write the questions you need to address at the top of where you're taking notes so you can keep that in mind the whole time you're working through the material.
3. Skip the case file and go directly to the case/statute file. Read through the statutes first and then the cases (even if they aren't in that order). Make notes and underline the stuff that seems relevant based on the facts from the task memo. You can usually start to outline at this point, paying particular attention to rules/tests that are important in the cases. Just make a sketchy outline of "the test for xyz requires 1. a, 2. b, and 3. c" leaving space after each step in the test.
4. Read through the case file and, in the outline of the test/rule, make notes of the relevant facts that apply to each step. Also keep in mind how the statutes apply to the facts of the case and make notes as necessary. By this point, you should have a mostly completed outline.
5. Put the finishing touches on your outline, making sure you have relevant facts from the case file to apply to each part of the test/rule from the cases and the statutory definitions. These first five steps should take you between 45-50 minutes. It seems like not that much time, but when you get in the habit of working systematically, each step flows pretty seamlessly into the next and you cut out a lot of wasted time worrying about where to go next.
6. Spend the last 45 minutes or so writing out the full memo/document, including all of the analysis and pieces of the document as described in the task memo.
7. Leave a couple minutes at the end to go back and make sure you formatted your document correctly, addressed every question you were supposed to address, and hit every part of the test as described in the relevant cases.

I know it seems like a lot, but I was super worried about the MPT initially and following this strategy has helped me feel WAY more at ease. Do a full, timed MPT once or twice following this and you'll really start to see it come together. Good luck!

Yes to this! It really does work. The first couple of times applying it will be tedious but it will become second nature! Good luck!

[northwood]

i would add to read the task memo carefully and write down what the task is especially if the assignor wasnts you to talk about one thing and the client wants an analysis of another ( so you know what your two main point headings are) if you are typing i would put these into the body of the document as I. First topic ( that the partner gives)

II. second thing( whatever it is the client wants)

doesn't matter what goes where.. unless they give you a specific order

[SEngland]

What are peoples thoughts on reading the cases before the statutes? The statutes can be lengthy and wordy and reading the cases seems to point out the specific portions of the statutes you need?

thoughts?

[Tanicius]

What are peoples thoughts on reading the cases before the statutes? The statutes can be lengthy and wordy and reading the cases seems to point out the specific portions of the statutes you need?

thoughts?

The statutes break things down into bullet points and have hard-to-define words like "reasonable" that you're supposed to look out for, which the cases will clarify.

Things won't make immediate sense when reading the statute, but starting with the statute gives you the roadmap for stuff to pay attention to when you're reading the cases.