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

[lawstoodent]

How many, if any, additional essays are you guys planning to do? Barbri is alloting 2 hours each for wills and torts essays. Would that be about 4 each?

[ellewoods123]

I'm tired of barbri's questions and explanations tbh. I'll stick with Adaptibar for the rest of my prep.

This. This. This.

I think Barbri's tactics served its purpose. But the problem is that I find myself struggling a bit when I go back to Adaptibar and I think it's because I'm overthinking things. I'm trying to understand how the question is trying to trick me when it's not. Real NCBE questions are difficult but less convoluted (most of them) than Barbri's.

This is EXACTLY me right now glad I'm not alone. I've been psyching myself out on super straightforward Adaptibar questions. My plan of attack is to just do a full comprehensive Adaptibar review and hope that the questions seem similar on game day.

Also - RE: essays. I know this has probably been reiterated somewhere in this thread but, are you guys just trying to focus on big picture at this point for the MEE? For example, for corporations I'm not even bothering trying to memorize all the details. I focused on business judgment rule/duty of care, duty of loyalty and like..piercing the corporate veil (I feel like those are most testable? Maybe sh voting too?)

Feeling very very overwhelmed. I was relatively calm throughout so I guess this is to be expected..

[millieanon]

FYI Barbri uploaded the phantom "Introduction" lecture for the MBE Refresher videos that she kept referring to. Only 18 mins total. The grid technique sounds interesting, although we're all probably doing some variation of it already...

[yodamiked]

Trying to decide if I should waste half my day going through those MBE Refresher videos at double speed. Has anyone done them that thinks they're worth the time, or would I be better off going through the answers in the book for the ones I struggled with?

[generaltoast]

Really not understanding how these percentile ranks work. I got whooped by evidence set 5, 8/18 and goal was 10. I know thats not good, but it has the effect of dropping me from 70th percentile in evidence all the way down to 14th percentile?? That is soul crushing

[millieanon]

Trying to decide if I should waste half my day going through those MBE Refresher videos at double speed. Has anyone done them that thinks they're worth the time, or would I be better off going through the answers in the book for the ones I struggled with?

I found them helpful. Double speed, no note taking, just letting it jog my thoughts. Comments on what were unusually difficult questions (that I usually got wrong) are good to understand what to expect. I find that if I read the answers to myself, I never really revisit it, it's in one ear and out the other. Plus you don't pick up on tactics or general comments about the type of question it is and why they gave it to us.

[LionelHutzJD]

I'm tired of barbri's questions and explanations tbh. I'll stick with Adaptibar for the rest of my prep.

This. This. This.

I think Barbri's tactics served its purpose. But the problem is that I find myself struggling a bit when I go back to Adaptibar and I think it's because I'm overthinking things. I'm trying to understand how the question is trying to trick me when it's not. Real NCBE questions are difficult but less convoluted (most of them) than Barbri's.

This is EXACTLY me right now glad I'm not alone. I've been psyching myself out on super straightforward Adaptibar questions. My plan of attack is to just do a full comprehensive Adaptibar review and hope that the questions seem similar on game day.

Also - RE: essays. I know this has probably been reiterated somewhere in this thread but, are you guys just trying to focus on big picture at this point for the MEE? For example, for corporations I'm not even bothering trying to memorize all the details. I focused on business judgment rule/duty of care, duty of loyalty and like..piercing the corporate veil (I feel like those are most testable? Maybe sh voting too?)

Feeling very very overwhelmed. I was relatively calm throughout so I guess this is to be expected..

Going for the big picture while focusing on the important, testable topics like you've mentioned. What i'm finding helpful, and this may not be the case for everyone else, is going through the CMR on each MEE topic. Each outline is only roughly 25 pages. I'm using yellow highlighter for common law and important topics and using a different color highlighter for all statutory based rules (UPC, UTC, UIFSA, Child custody act, etc).

Also, I would study shareholder voting.

[Ref]

Really not understanding how these percentile ranks work. I got whooped by evidence set 5, 8/18 and goal was 10. I know thats not good, but it has the effect of dropping me from 70th percentile in evidence all the way down to 14th percentile?? That is soul crushing

Same thing happened to me - that was by far my worst of the Set 5s, but clearly we're in the minority.

My approach is that it's only one data point. The BarBri percentiles aren't as helpful as they seem - follow the law of averages; if you're around where you want to be overall, then I wouldn't stress. Especially if you did alright with evidence with the refresher.

[rmhco]

I'm tired of barbri's questions and explanations tbh. I'll stick with Adaptibar for the rest of my prep.

This. This. This.

I've definitely found the answer choices and responses to be infuriating on more than one occasion: "this might be true if the court decides it's true, and even though this doesn't carry great weight it might carry enough"--those don't seem like they can be real MBE questions because they're so subjective?? But maybe I'm just hoping the MBE is more rational than BarBri's final questions.

[rmhco]

Really not understanding how these percentile ranks work. I got whooped by evidence set 5, 8/18 and goal was 10. I know thats not good, but it has the effect of dropping me from 70th percentile in evidence all the way down to 14th percentile?? That is soul crushing

Pretty sure the percentiles are JUST for each week taken individually. There were a few weeks where I've done all my questions sets for some topics on AdaptiBar for various reasons, and then haven't gotten a percentile at all that week in BarBri. Keep in mind that if you only did 18 questions, you'll be measured against people who did 50 or more just through BarBri and most of those weren't the crazy bullshit Set 5 and 6.

[generaltoast]

Really not understanding how these percentile ranks work. I got whooped by evidence set 5, 8/18 and goal was 10. I know thats not good, but it has the effect of dropping me from 70th percentile in evidence all the way down to 14th percentile?? That is soul crushing

Pretty sure the percentiles are JUST for each week taken individually. There were a few weeks where I've done all my questions sets for some topics on AdaptiBar for various reasons, and then haven't gotten a percentile at all that week in BarBri. Keep in mind that if you only did 18 questions, you'll be measured against people who did 50 or more just through BarBri and most of those weren't the crazy bullshit Set 5 and 6.

Ahh ok, that does make more sense that it's just for that week. Still not a pleasant thing to see 1 week before game day, but definitely not as bad as being in the 14th percentile overall for the whole program.

[rmhco]

Really not understanding how these percentile ranks work. I got whooped by evidence set 5, 8/18 and goal was 10. I know thats not good, but it has the effect of dropping me from 70th percentile in evidence all the way down to 14th percentile?? That is soul crushing

Pretty sure the percentiles are JUST for each week taken individually. There were a few weeks where I've done all my questions sets for some topics on AdaptiBar for various reasons, and then haven't gotten a percentile at all that week in BarBri. Keep in mind that if you only did 18 questions, you'll be measured against people who did 50 or more just through BarBri and most of those weren't the crazy bullshit Set 5 and 6.

Ahh ok, that does make more sense that it's just for that week. Still not a pleasant thing to see 1 week before game day, but definitely not as bad as being in the 14th percentile overall for the whole program.

Haha yep! I'm in the 17th for Property based on Set 5, if that makes ya feel any better

[rmhco]

Tort Set 6 - Question 8

[+] Spoiler

Despite the trespass, would the heart attack suffered by the man and its associated liability not be cut off due to a lack of proximate causation?

[+] Spoiler

this question confuses the hell out of me. I swear we learned in lecture that when someone commits trespass for private necessity, they aren't liable for TRESPASS, but they are liable for the resulting damage. This is essentially what the answer explanation says, but comes to a different conclusion. It really seems like given the private nuisance information he WOULDN'T be liable for trespass, but would be liable for either NIED or the tort referenced above.

To the point above, I think the "but for" analysis is attempting to suggest that the man wouldn't have been frightened if the guy hadn't come through the window, but it also seems like an important fact would need to be proven--that the heart attack was caused by the fear.

[mvp99]

Tort Set 6 - Question 8

[+] Spoiler

Despite the trespass, would the heart attack suffered by the man and its associated liability not be cut off due to a lack of proximate causation?

[+] Spoiler

this question confuses the hell out of me. I swear we learned in lecture that when someone commits trespass for private necessity, they aren't liable for TRESPASS, but they are liable for the resulting damage. This is essentially what the answer explanation says, but comes to a different conclusion. It really seems like given the private nuisance information he WOULDN'T be liable for trespass, but would be liable for either NIED or the tort referenced above.

To the point above, I think the "but for" analysis is attempting to suggest that the man wouldn't have been frightened if the guy hadn't come through the window, but it also seems like an important fact would need to be proven--that the heart attack was caused by the fear.

[+] Spoiler

A defendant who commits trespass and invokes the defense of private necessity must still pay for any harm done to the property caused by his trespass, however, the defendant is not liable for nominal or punitive damages. So the recovery of actual damages is still under an action for trespass. But was there nay indication of actual damages in the fact pattern?

[learntolift]

on the psp home page if you click on the progress tab and look at the "practice questions done" info, does that count the simulated MBE and the 100 question refresher the other day? i am only at 1,074

[ArtistOfManliness]

Can someone please explain to me the difference between Crim MPQ5-14 and MPQ6-6 about custodial interrogations?

[+] Spoiler

MPQ6-6, the police conduct here in putting the defendant in a jail cell with an informant who has been directed to elicit incriminating information was not custodial interrogation, but in MPQ5-14 it was custodial interrogation in violation of the Sixth Amendment when the defendant was placed in a jail cell with another suspect and secretly recorded because it was a situation that "the police created likely to induce the defendant to make an incriminating statement." What is the difference between the two?

[ellewoods123]

Can someone please explain to me the difference between Crim MPQ5-14 and MPQ6-6 about custodial interrogations?

[+] Spoiler

MPQ6-6, the police conduct here in putting the defendant in a jail cell with an informant who has been directed to elicit incriminating information was not custodial interrogation, but in MPQ5-14 it was custodial interrogation in violation of the Sixth Amendment when the defendant was placed in a jail cell with another suspect and secretly recorded because it was a situation that "the police created likely to induce the defendant to make an incriminating statement." What is the difference between the two?

It turns on how the call of the question is asked. The first scenario focused on absence of inherently coercive environment, not the "likely to induce incriminating statement" prong. There was no inherently coercive environment because the D had no reason to know he was talking to informant. This is true in the second scenario, as you note, but the call of the question now does turn on the "likely to induce incriminating statements" rather than the "inherently coercive" prong

[ellewoods123]

Can someone please explain to me the difference between Crim MPQ5-14 and MPQ6-6 about custodial interrogations?

[+] Spoiler

MPQ6-6, the police conduct here in putting the defendant in a jail cell with an informant who has been directed to elicit incriminating information was not custodial interrogation, but in MPQ5-14 it was custodial interrogation in violation of the Sixth Amendment when the defendant was placed in a jail cell with another suspect and secretly recorded because it was a situation that "the police created likely to induce the defendant to make an incriminating statement." What is the difference between the two?

It turns on how the call of the question is asked. The first scenario focused on absence of inherently coercive environment, not the "likely to induce incriminating statement" prong. There was no inherently coercive environment because the D had no reason to know he was talking to informant. This is true in the second scenario, as you note, but the call of the question now does turn on the "likely to induce incriminating statements" rather than the "inherently coercive" prong

Also - I just looked at the two questions. Focus on the correct answer with the right reasoning via process of elimination. Also be careful, it's a 5A violation not a 6A. 6A doesn't attach until arraignment

[ballouttacontrol]

I don't remember the question #, but a question said that confessions obtained in violation of right to counsel can be used for interrogation

This is the question where the bailiff asked the defendant questions in the courtroom without attorney present, and he confessed

This is a violation of BOTH 6A and 5A right to counsel right? So, a confession obtained in violation of either the 5th or 6th would be admissible for purposes of impressment

Am I understanding this right?

[ellewoods123]

I don't remember the question #, but a question said that confessions obtained in violation of right to counsel can be used for interrogation

This is the question where the bailiff asked the defendant questions in the courtroom without attorney present, and he confessed

This is a violation of BOTH 6A and 5A right to counsel right? So, a confession obtained in violation of either the 5th or 6th would be admissible for purposes of impressment

Am I understanding this right?

Yes, this 6A would have attached here, but just remember that the 6A is also offense specific so the bailiff could have questioned him about an unrelated charge and no 6A violation. (I don't think that was problematic in this question - I vaguely remember it was about arson or something?) And yes, confessions obtained in violation of the 5A or 6A are admissible for purposes of impeachment, just never on the prosecution's case in chief

hope that helps!

[ballouttacontrol]

Thx!

[ellewoods123]

does anybody have some short of plain english explanation for after acquired title rules of priority for secured transactions?

Here's what I know (is this enough to get me a pass should the dreaded essay appear?_

UCC article 9 governs

i've gotten through the basics (attachment, perfection, priority).

I know that generally perfected prevails over unperfected. I know that as between two perfected, first to perfect prevails. I know that PMSI in consumer goods perfect automatically. LOST on the rest. equipment/inventory can only attain perfection by filing or possesion? what the eff is an after acquired title? jdafdjkfhaskjdfsda.

[LionelHutzJD]

does anybody have some short of plain english explanation for after acquired title rules of priority for secured transactions?

Here's what I know (is this enough to get me a pass should the dreaded essay appear?_

UCC article 9 governs

i've gotten through the basics (attachment, perfection, priority).

I know that generally perfected prevails over unperfected. I know that as between two perfected, first to perfect prevails. I know that PMSI in consumer goods perfect automatically. LOST on the rest. equipment/inventory can only attain perfection by filing or possesion? what the eff is an after acquired title? jdafdjkfhaskjdfsda.

I've lit a candle every night praying that secured transactions does not appear on the exam.

[arklaw13]

does anybody have some short of plain english explanation for after acquired title rules of priority for secured transactions?

Here's what I know (is this enough to get me a pass should the dreaded essay appear?_

UCC article 9 governs

i've gotten through the basics (attachment, perfection, priority).

I know that generally perfected prevails over unperfected. I know that as between two perfected, first to perfect prevails. I know that PMSI in consumer goods perfect automatically. LOST on the rest. equipment/inventory can only attain perfection by filing or possesion? what the eff is an after acquired title? jdafdjkfhaskjdfsda.

I think as far as after-acquired inventory and equipment, the way they test it is up against a PMSI held by the seller of the inventory/equipment. So:

1. Debtor gets financing, gives security interest in equipment or inventory with an "after-acquired" clause. Financier files a financing statement, perfecting its interest.

2. Debtor buys equipment/inventory from seller with seller financing, so seller gets a PSMI, so it's interest is perfected too.

3. Equipment seller usually doesn't file a financing statement within 20 days of giving it to debtor, so original financier's interest gets priority. OR

3.1 Equipment seller does file a financing statement within 20 days, so its PMSI gets priority.

3.2 If inventory, seller doesn't file a financing statement before delivery, so financier's interest gets priority. OR

3.4 Seller does file a financing statement before delivery, so its PMSI still gets priority.

Or something like that. hth

[LionelHutzJD]

Corporations:

In Freer's lecture he said that a Corporation must receive "par" value upon an issuance of stock. If the stock is sold below "par" (water) then the director or purchaser must make up the difference.

However, in the CMR it states "The RMBCA generally has eliminated the concept of par and allows corps. to issue shares for whatever consideration the directors deem appropriate" It makes no mention of making of the "water" (This is my best attempt at explaining a Corps. scenario, I apologize)

Can anyone clarify whether a director or purchaser must make up of the difference of stock issued below "par"?