Themis Bar Review Hangout - July 2016 Forum

[xfer999]

I'm finally getting around to Conflict of Laws, and now I'm very confused about whether statutes of limitation are procedural and substantive.

In CIv Pro lectures and MBE prep, they told us that the Supreme Court ruled SOL are substantive. But now in CoL, I'm being told they're procedural.

Can someone explain?

Yes. I shit you not, the rule is that for Erie purposes (fed vs state) they're substantive, but for choice of law purposes (state vs state) they're procedural. I remember wondering the same thing, and being relieved (and annoyed) when I finally came across a reference (can't remember where) confirming the inconsistency.

[ndp1234]

I'm finally getting around to Conflict of Laws, and now I'm very confused about whether statutes of limitation are procedural and substantive.

In CIv Pro lectures and MBE prep, they told us that the Supreme Court ruled SOL are substantive. But now in CoL, I'm being told they're procedural.

Can someone explain?

Yes, so for diversity Erie purposes SOLs are substantive (basically because we don't want forum shopping as between federal and state courts solely based on time limitations)

However, for Conflicts, it's a different rule and considered procedural because it's a choice of what law to apply, not the forum. Generally if the forum SOL bars the claim then it applies its own rule. We shouldn't be forcing states to hear claims that it would bar in the first place because of choice of law rules. Of course there are exceptions (like bound up with a substantive Right under 1st Rstmt or significant relationship test under 2nd Rstmt)

At least that's how I remember it and reconcile it in my head.

Can you guys tell I love procedure yet?

[NaeDeen]

I'm finally getting around to Conflict of Laws, and now I'm very confused about whether statutes of limitation are procedural and substantive.

In CIv Pro lectures and MBE prep, they told us that the Supreme Court ruled SOL are substantive. But now in CoL, I'm being told they're procedural.

Can someone explain?

SOL is substantive according to the FRCP. However, I have not studied conflict of law--took international law in while in law school, dropped it on the third day. I tried to read this article to help you out, but it's just too early and I'm working with limited amounts of brain cells right now.

http://www.law.fsu.edu/docs/default-sou ... f?sfvrsn=3

Hope that it helps...

[NaeDeen]

Is it conflict of laws (international) OR choice of laws (US)? Cause I was under the impression you were talking about conflicts pertaining to international law.

[NaeDeen]

I sure am going to miss the "look at all the work you're NOT getting done" progress bar!!
GOOD MORNING!

[blach0987]

Does anyone have a sense of what would be most important to memorize for trusts? I haven't been focusing on most of the MEE topics but need to review this week so I can at least attempt to write a coherent essay if it comes up.

[hirkaismyname]

I'm finally getting around to Conflict of Laws, and now I'm very confused about whether statutes of limitation are procedural and substantive.

In CIv Pro lectures and MBE prep, they told us that the Supreme Court ruled SOL are substantive. But now in CoL, I'm being told they're procedural.

Can someone explain?

Yes, so for diversity Erie purposes SOLs are substantive (basically because we don't want forum shopping as between federal and state courts solely based on time limitations)

However, for Conflicts, it's a different rule and considered procedural because it's a choice of what law to apply, not the forum. Generally if the forum SOL bars the claim then it applies its own rule. We shouldn't be forcing states to hear claims that it would bar in the first place because of choice of law rules. Of course there are exceptions (like bound up with a substantive Right under 1st Rstmt or significant relationship test under 2nd Rstmt)

At least that's how I remember it and reconcile it in my head.

Can you guys tell I love procedure yet?

I'm confused. Can you please help me understand this:

If the forum SOL (state in which the case is being heard) bars the claim (prevents it from being heard bc SOL has lapsed) then it applies its own rule (is the "own" rule the rule of the forum state?).

[unidentifiable]

Does anyone have a sense of what would be most important to memorize for trusts? I haven't been focusing on most of the MEE topics but need to review this week so I can at least attempt to write a coherent essay if it comes up.

I've personally been focusing on:

Express Trust creation requirements
Charitable Trusts (specially, cy pres)
Resulting Trusts
The 4 Asset Protection Trusts
Claflin Doctrine
Settlor/Beneficary Termination and Mofication
Removal, Resignation, Duties of Trustee

Would probably be good to know a little about Powers of Appointment, too.

Oh yeah, and fucking Will Contracts because of that stupid shit graded Wills essay.

[Hmasterflex]

Are we expected to memorize all of the outines?

I did all of my graded essays from memory and the last few were pretty good (except commercial paper), but I'm concerned I won't be able to remember everything come game time.

[AlanShore]

Are we expected to memorize all of the outines?

I did all of my graded essays from memory and the last few were pretty good (except commercial paper), but I'm concerned I won't be able to remember everything come game time.

My rep just sent out an email basically saying that we should not worry too much about getting the elements exactly right. She said paraphrasing it OK. There is no way I'm going to correctly remember everything - for example Conlaw has a million different standards that are almost the same but not... ugh. I think if you get most of them right and just make an educated guess on the ones you're not sure about you're fine.

[KD35]

Are we expected to memorize all of the outines?

I did all of my graded essays from memory and the last few were pretty good (except commercial paper), but I'm concerned I won't be able to remember everything come game time.

My rep just sent out an email basically saying that we should not worry too much about getting the elements exactly right. She said paraphrasing it OK. There is no way I'm going to correctly remember everything - for example Conlaw has a million different standards that are almost the same but not... ugh. I think if you get most of them right and just make an educated guess on the ones you're not sure about you're fine.

That's my understanding too. It is a test of minimum competence. The sample essays that they give us are often WAY better than what we would ever need to produce on exam day itself.

[ultimolugar]

Are we expected to memorize all of the outines?

I did all of my graded essays from memory and the last few were pretty good (except commercial paper), but I'm concerned I won't be able to remember everything come game time.

My rep just sent out an email basically saying that we should not worry too much about getting the elements exactly right. She said paraphrasing it OK. There is no way I'm going to correctly remember everything - for example Conlaw has a million different standards that are almost the same but not... ugh. I think if you get most of them right and just make an educated guess on the ones you're not sure about you're fine.

That's my understanding too. It is a test of minimum competence. The sample essays that they give us are often WAY better than what we would ever need to produce on exam day itself.

I personally plan to drool on the paper and finagle that into an art nouveau interpretation of the statute of frauds. 500 drops of spittle! Must be in writing!






I've lost my mind.

[ndp1234]

So who else here started the 100 PQ set from the book and didn't realize there was a supplement?

Halfway through I remembered so I had to stop the clock to go print out the supplement. Annoying.

[rambleon65]

So who else here started the 100 PQ set from the book and didn't realize there was a supplement?

Halfway through I remembered so I had to stop the clock to go print out the supplement. Annoying.

I was going to do it time and on paper / whatnot... but I decided to just do it like the 50 question in interactive mode. Based on simulated timing really won't be an issue and i found that I tend to learn better if I know immediately (a) whether I got it wrong/right, and (b) why i got it wrong/right.

They were noticeably harder than the other mixed sets though... as well as few questions that were just.. idk... off. anyone else?

[unidentifiable]

So who else here started the 100 PQ set from the book and didn't realize there was a supplement?

Halfway through I remembered so I had to stop the clock to go print out the supplement. Annoying.

I was going to do it time and on paper / whatnot... but I decided to just do it like the 50 question in interactive mode. Based on simulated timing really won't be an issue and i found that I tend to learn better if I know immediately (a) whether I got it wrong/right, and (b) why i got it wrong/right.

They were noticeably harder than the other mixed sets though... as well as few questions that were just.. idk... off. anyone else?

yeah a lot of those questions were just shit.

[WinSome]

So who else here started the 100 PQ set from the book and didn't realize there was a supplement?

Halfway through I remembered so I had to stop the clock to go print out the supplement. Annoying.

I was going to do it time and on paper / whatnot... but I decided to just do it like the 50 question in interactive mode. Based on simulated timing really won't be an issue and i found that I tend to learn better if I know immediately (a) whether I got it wrong/right, and (b) why i got it wrong/right.

They were noticeably harder than the other mixed sets though... as well as few questions that were just.. idk... off. anyone else?

yeah a lot of those questions were just shit.

There were some that seemed to have two potentially correct answers and there were others that seemed to have no "good" answers that just involved picking the least shitty one. I remember there was a contract question that

[+] Spoiler

involved a repudiation where the buyer relied on the repudiation and purchased replacement goods. The seller recovered the difference between the new contract and the repudiated and the question asked why. One answer said because the seller repudiated and another answer recited how expectation damages are calculated. Obviously but for the repudiation the buyer would not be able to recover and the recovery would be in expectation damages. So both seemed to be right, but I chose the repudiation option because that seemed to be more what the question was asking about. Nope the answer was the seller could recover expectation damages.

[ndp1234]

So who else here started the 100 PQ set from the book and didn't realize there was a supplement?

Halfway through I remembered so I had to stop the clock to go print out the supplement. Annoying.

I was going to do it time and on paper / whatnot... but I decided to just do it like the 50 question in interactive mode. Based on simulated timing really won't be an issue and i found that I tend to learn better if I know immediately (a) whether I got it wrong/right, and (b) why i got it wrong/right.

They were noticeably harder than the other mixed sets though... as well as few questions that were just.. idk... off. anyone else?

yeah a lot of those questions were just shit.

LOL @ Post Office clause

[unidentifiable]

So who else here started the 100 PQ set from the book and didn't realize there was a supplement?

Halfway through I remembered so I had to stop the clock to go print out the supplement. Annoying.

I was going to do it time and on paper / whatnot... but I decided to just do it like the 50 question in interactive mode. Based on simulated timing really won't be an issue and i found that I tend to learn better if I know immediately (a) whether I got it wrong/right, and (b) why i got it wrong/right.

They were noticeably harder than the other mixed sets though... as well as few questions that were just.. idk... off. anyone else?

yeah a lot of those questions were just shit.

There were some that seemed to have two potentially correct answers and there were others that seemed to have no "good" answers that just involved picking the least shitty one. I remember there was a contract question that

[+] Spoiler

involved a repudiation where the buyer relied on the repudiation and purchased replacement goods. The seller recovered the difference between the new contract and the repudiated and the question asked why. One answer said because the seller repudiated and another answer recited how expectation damages are calculated. Obviously but for the repudiation the buyer would not be able to recover and the recovery would be in expectation damages. So both seemed to be right, but I chose the repudiation option because that seemed to be more what the question was asking about. Nope the answer was the seller could recover expectation damages.

i answered exactly the same. after reading the explanation, I yelled bullshit out loud.

[rambleon65]

So who else here started the 100 PQ set from the book and didn't realize there was a supplement?

Halfway through I remembered so I had to stop the clock to go print out the supplement. Annoying.

I was going to do it time and on paper / whatnot... but I decided to just do it like the 50 question in interactive mode. Based on simulated timing really won't be an issue and i found that I tend to learn better if I know immediately (a) whether I got it wrong/right, and (b) why i got it wrong/right.

They were noticeably harder than the other mixed sets though... as well as few questions that were just.. idk... off. anyone else?

yeah a lot of those questions were just shit.

There were some that seemed to have two potentially correct answers and there were others that seemed to have no "good" answers that just involved picking the least shitty one. I remember there was a contract question that

[+] Spoiler

involved a repudiation where the buyer relied on the repudiation and purchased replacement goods. The seller recovered the difference between the new contract and the repudiated and the question asked why. One answer said because the seller repudiated and another answer recited how expectation damages are calculated. Obviously but for the repudiation the buyer would not be able to recover and the recovery would be in expectation damages. So both seemed to be right, but I chose the repudiation option because that seemed to be more what the question was asking about. Nope the answer was the seller could recover expectation damages.

Yes!

[+] Spoiler

The question said that BECAUSE the repudiator COULD retract its repudiation, this wasn't the determining answer. HOWEVER, this answer ignores the rule that if the other party relies on a valid repudiation, that retraction is not allowed. Here, the non-repudiating party had relied on the repudiation and signed a contract w/ a different party (at a higher price).

I'm not making that rule up re repudiation and retraction, right?

[Vantwins]

Are we expected to memorize all of the outines?

I did all of my graded essays from memory and the last few were pretty good (except commercial paper), but I'm concerned I won't be able to remember everything come game time.

It's rough and too much info to retain. Rack up the points on the topics you know decently to make up for another essay or two where you're basically making crap up!

Yesterday, I read through my corporations law stuff, and wrote a decent essay answer that matched the major points in the sample answer. Today I'm reading through partnerships and again wrote a decent answer, but I feel like I already forgot 80% of corporations that I studied yesterday. It is so frustrating.

[Hmasterflex]

Are we expected to memorize all of the outines?

I did all of my graded essays from memory and the last few were pretty good (except commercial paper), but I'm concerned I won't be able to remember everything come game time.

It's rough and too much info to retain. Rack up the points on the topics you know decently to make up for another essay or two where you're basically making crap up!

Yesterday, I read through my corporations law stuff, and wrote a decent essay answer that matched the major points in the sample answer. Today I'm reading through partnerships and again wrote a decent answer, but I feel like I already forgot 80% of corporations that I studied yesterday. It is so frustrating.

I am basically slamming my face on the keyboard for secured transactions and commercial paper. Any broad overviews for CP would be helpful.

[WinSome]

I'm not making that rule up re repudiation and retraction, right?

Nope. Detrimental reliance on a repudiation means that the repudiation cannot be retracted without the other party's consent.

[rambleon65]

Are we expected to memorize all of the outines?

I did all of my graded essays from memory and the last few were pretty good (except commercial paper), but I'm concerned I won't be able to remember everything come game time.

It's rough and too much info to retain. Rack up the points on the topics you know decently to make up for another essay or two where you're basically making crap up!

Yesterday, I read through my corporations law stuff, and wrote a decent essay answer that matched the major points in the sample answer. Today I'm reading through partnerships and again wrote a decent answer, but I feel like I already forgot 80% of corporations that I studied yesterday. It is so frustrating.

I am basically slamming my face on the keyboard for secured transactions and commercial paper. Any broad overviews for CP would be helpful.

Honestly, all I'm doing is memorizing the two standards for (1) whether it is a negotiable instrument, and (2) whether a holder is in due course. I'm also just looking at what defense there is under real vs. personal.

After that, just sue up the chain (the chain of the instrument passing hands) regardless of who was at fault, until you get to the wrongdoer.

[NaeDeen]

Are we expected to memorize all of the outines?

I did all of my graded essays from memory and the last few were pretty good (except commercial paper), but I'm concerned I won't be able to remember everything come game time.

My rep just sent out an email basically saying that we should not worry too much about getting the elements exactly right. She said paraphrasing it OK. There is no way I'm going to correctly remember everything - for example Conlaw has a million different standards that are almost the same but not... ugh. I think if you get most of them right and just make an educated guess on the ones you're not sure about you're fine.

That's my understanding too. It is a test of minimum competence. The sample essays that they give us are often WAY better than what we would ever need to produce on exam day itself.

I personally plan to drool on the paper and finagle that into an art nouveau interpretation of the statute of frauds. 500 drops of spittle! Must be in writing!

I've lost my mind.

Holy shit, I literally just laughed out loud. Love this!

[NaeDeen]

Are we expected to memorize all of the outines?

I did all of my graded essays from memory and the last few were pretty good (except commercial paper), but I'm concerned I won't be able to remember everything come game time.

It's rough and too much info to retain. Rack up the points on the topics you know decently to make up for another essay or two where you're basically making crap up!

Yesterday, I read through my corporations law stuff, and wrote a decent essay answer that matched the major points in the sample answer. Today I'm reading through partnerships and again wrote a decent answer, but I feel like I already forgot 80% of corporations that I studied yesterday. It is so frustrating.

I am basically slamming my face on the keyboard for secured transactions and commercial paper. Any broad overviews for CP would be helpful.

Honestly, all I'm doing is memorizing the two standards for (1) whether it is a negotiable instrument, and (2) whether a holder is in due course. I'm also just looking at what defense there is under real vs. personal.

After that, just sue up the chain (the chain of the instrument passing hands) regardless of who was at fault, until you get to the wrongdoer.

Agreed. One thing I'm doing differently is using the MD frequently tested subjects that Themis sent us and tailoring my studies to the ones that are actually tested. A majority of the UCC stuff is not tested.

On another note, I am sure everyone here will pass with flying colors!!