Contracts essay approach Forum
Forum rules
Anonymous Posting
Anonymous posting is only appropriate when you are sharing sensitive information about bar exam prep. You may anonymously respond on topic to these threads. Unacceptable uses include: harassing another user, joking around, testing the feature, or other things that are more appropriate in the lounge.
Failure to follow these rules will get you outed, warned, or banned."
Anonymous Posting
Anonymous posting is only appropriate when you are sharing sensitive information about bar exam prep. You may anonymously respond on topic to these threads. Unacceptable uses include: harassing another user, joking around, testing the feature, or other things that are more appropriate in the lounge.
Failure to follow these rules will get you outed, warned, or banned."
-
Law-So-Hard
- Posts: 172
- Joined: Fri Jul 18, 2014 6:00 pm
Contracts essay approach
I've been going thru the rubric Barbri provides - Applicable law, formation, terms... - but when I look at model answers they go straight into the issue in the essay. I did that a couple times on older essays and lost points because I didn't discuss the basics like offer and acceptance. What am I missing?
-
Mr. Pink
- Posts: 131
- Joined: Tue Jan 22, 2013 8:08 pm
Re: Contracts essay approach
If the facts state there is a valid contract, then you don't need to spend any time on the formation stuff. I think I would I still mention it- maybe a couple of sentences at most, but no need to analyze it. You always want to mention the applicable law however.
If the facts do not state there is a valid contract, then yes it should be discussed.
Not sure if this is helps since I don't know what the questions are, but I have usually scored very well on contracts stuff and it's all about RTFQ (as with all questions). If they want to discuss remedies or excuse of performance or something, and state there was a valid contract.... then mention there is a valid contract and jump right into the interrogatory. If they ask about that stuff and do not state there is a valid contract, then go through the mutual assent/consideration stuff and you will come across a potential formation defense or something of the like.
If the facts do not state there is a valid contract, then yes it should be discussed.
Not sure if this is helps since I don't know what the questions are, but I have usually scored very well on contracts stuff and it's all about RTFQ (as with all questions). If they want to discuss remedies or excuse of performance or something, and state there was a valid contract.... then mention there is a valid contract and jump right into the interrogatory. If they ask about that stuff and do not state there is a valid contract, then go through the mutual assent/consideration stuff and you will come across a potential formation defense or something of the like.
