Adaptibar CivPro Forum

Discussions related to the bar exam are found in this 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."
blueapple08

New
Posts: 37
Joined: Mon May 23, 2016 3:44 pm

Adaptibar CivPro

Post by blueapple08 » Wed Jun 08, 2016 9:46 am

Anyone else having mixed feelings about adaptibar's civ pro questions? I'm finding them really oddly worded and not having the best explanations.

seasidemama

New
Posts: 66
Joined: Mon Apr 11, 2016 4:48 am

Re: Adaptibar CivPro

Post by seasidemama » Wed Jun 08, 2016 9:52 am

blueapple08 wrote:Anyone else having mixed feelings about adaptibar's civ pro questions? I'm finding them really oddly worded and not having the best explanations.
The only released civ pro questions are the 20 q sample from ncbe. Other than that I think it's pretty difficult to speculate how similar/not practice qs are. Civ pro is tough for me regardless so I haven't really formed an opinion as to whether adaptibar is at fault.
I do think the explanations are OK.


How do you feel adaptibar's qs compare to the samples provided by NCBE?

blueapple08

New
Posts: 37
Joined: Mon May 23, 2016 3:44 pm

Re: Adaptibar CivPro

Post by blueapple08 » Wed Jun 08, 2016 4:12 pm

I feel like the sample questions from NCBE are a little more detailed and less vague about certain facts than adaptibar. Civ Pro is also one of my worst subjects so I'm having a tough time figuring out whether it's just me or not.

User avatar
ultimolugar

Bronze
Posts: 122
Joined: Wed May 18, 2016 2:09 pm

Re: Adaptibar CivPro

Post by ultimolugar » Thu Jun 09, 2016 3:49 pm

blueapple08 wrote:I feel like the sample questions from NCBE are a little more detailed and less vague about certain facts than adaptibar. Civ Pro is also one of my worst subjects so I'm having a tough time figuring out whether it's just me or not.
It's not you, the Adaptibar civil procedure questions are hot garbage.

User avatar
TheLegalOne

New
Posts: 67
Joined: Fri Nov 07, 2014 11:42 pm

Re: Adaptibar CivPro

Post by TheLegalOne » Fri Jun 10, 2016 10:45 pm

ultimolugar wrote:
blueapple08 wrote:I feel like the sample questions from NCBE are a little more detailed and less vague about certain facts than adaptibar. Civ Pro is also one of my worst subjects so I'm having a tough time figuring out whether it's just me or not.
It's not you, the Adaptibar civil procedure questions are hot garbage.
I start Adaptibar's CivPro this evening and I am not looking forward to them (unlike how I could not wait to start Evidence). Thanks for the heads up!

Want to continue reading?

Register now to search topics and post comments!

Absolutely FREE!


squiggle

Bronze
Posts: 162
Joined: Thu Sep 10, 2015 2:07 am

Re: Adaptibar CivPro

Post by squiggle » Sat Jun 11, 2016 1:27 am

I haven't done any civ pro questions on Adaptibar, but I'm considering using the new Emmanuel's book for civ pro instead. I haven't seen any reviews on Emmanuel's civ pro questions yet. No bar prep programs seem to have good Civ Pro questions though, so I'm not really sure what to do!

not guilty

Bronze
Posts: 278
Joined: Fri Dec 18, 2015 8:22 pm

Re: Adaptibar CivPro

Post by not guilty » Sat Jun 11, 2016 12:16 pm

squiggle wrote:I haven't done any civ pro questions on Adaptibar, but I'm considering using the new Emmanuel's book for civ pro instead. I haven't seen any reviews on Emmanuel's civ pro questions yet. No bar prep programs seem to have good Civ Pro questions though, so I'm not really sure what to do!
they suck ass. you get lost in a fact pattern very easily and based off the MBE generally speaking, issue spotting is usually easy. fact patterns are concise. it's answer choices that are hard.

maniclaw00

New
Posts: 11
Joined: Sat May 14, 2016 6:35 pm

Re: Adaptibar CivPro

Post by maniclaw00 » Sun Jun 12, 2016 7:12 pm

I feel the same way, they are mixing subjects too easily (just made a post about this). When all else fails, follow the question stem with laser focus.

myrtlewinston

Bronze
Posts: 462
Joined: Sun May 24, 2015 8:39 pm

Re: Adaptibar CivPro

Post by myrtlewinston » Mon Jun 13, 2016 7:16 pm

Who has good Civ Pro questions then?

Want to continue reading?

Register for access!

Did I mention it was FREE ?


not guilty

Bronze
Posts: 278
Joined: Fri Dec 18, 2015 8:22 pm

Re: Adaptibar CivPro

Post by not guilty » Tue Jun 14, 2016 7:42 pm

I'm in need of Adaptibar discount code. Last one was invalid?

smittick

New
Posts: 1
Joined: Tue Jun 14, 2016 9:06 pm

Re: Adaptibar CivPro

Post by smittick » Tue Jun 14, 2016 9:22 pm

:mrgreen:
not guilty wrote:I'm in need of Adaptibar discount code. Last one was invalid?
I just sent you a code. Check your inbox!

myrtlewinston

Bronze
Posts: 462
Joined: Sun May 24, 2015 8:39 pm

Re: Adaptibar CivPro

Post by myrtlewinston » Wed Jun 15, 2016 3:24 pm

squiggle wrote:I haven't done any civ pro questions on Adaptibar, but I'm considering using the new Emmanuel's book for civ pro instead. I haven't seen any reviews on Emmanuel's civ pro questions yet. No bar prep programs seem to have good Civ Pro questions though, so I'm not really sure what to do!
I have the edition before. It came with a code for online Civ Pro questions. But I lost the code!

pinaylawyer

New
Posts: 14
Joined: Tue May 17, 2016 10:53 am

Re: Adaptibar CivPro

Post by pinaylawyer » Wed Jun 15, 2016 10:56 pm

got dumbfounded with this. kindly explain

QUESTION:

A car manufacturer who advertised and sold cars around the world was incorporated in Country A. The manufacturer also advertised and sold cars in Country B, specifically targeting each state in Country B, including State N. A driver from State N brought suit against the manufacturer in the federal district court in State N, claiming that his car was negligently designed. Although the driver resides in State N now, his car was purchased in a foreign country, Country C.

For years, the manufacturer has modified its cars to comply with the laws of the nation in which the cars are to be sold. Thus, cars sold in Country C, including the car sold to the driver, differed in material respects from cars sold in Country B. In response to the driver's complaint, the manufacturer timely filed a motion to dismiss in federal court in State N for lack of personal jurisdiction. The State N long-arm statute authorized the assertion of jurisdiction over the manufacturer. The only question is the constitutionality of the assertion of jurisdiction.

Should the court grant the manufacturer's motion to dismiss for lack of personal jurisdiction?
A. No, because the manufacturer is engaged in continuous and systematic activity in State N so substantial that it is constitutional for State N to assert jurisdiction over the manufacturer, even on a claim that did not arise out of the manufacturer's business in State N.
B. No, because the driver's claim is related to the manufacturer's activity in State N since it concerns a car designed by the manufacturer, and the manufacturer designs and manufactures other cars that are sold in State N.
C. Yes, because the driver's claim is unrelated to the manufacturer's purposeful availing activities in State N.
D. Yes, because the doctrine of forum non conveniens requires that the suit be brought in Country C, where the driver purchased the car in question.

Answer : C is correct. Because the driver's claim is unrelated the manufacturer's activity in State N, the court lacks personal jurisdiction over the manufacturer.

Register now!

Resources to assist law school applicants, students & graduates.

It's still FREE!


seasidemama

New
Posts: 66
Joined: Mon Apr 11, 2016 4:48 am

Re: Adaptibar CivPro

Post by seasidemama » Thu Jun 16, 2016 1:37 am

pinaylawyer wrote:got dumbfounded with this. kindly explain

QUESTION:

A car manufacturer who advertised and sold cars around the world was incorporated in Country A. The manufacturer also advertised and sold cars in Country B, specifically targeting each state in Country B, including State N. A driver from State N brought suit against the manufacturer in the federal district court in State N, claiming that his car was negligently designed. Although the driver resides in State N now, his car was purchased in a foreign country, Country C.

For years, the manufacturer has modified its cars to comply with the laws of the nation in which the cars are to be sold. Thus, cars sold in Country C, including the car sold to the driver, differed in material respects from cars sold in Country B. In response to the driver's complaint, the manufacturer timely filed a motion to dismiss in federal court in State N for lack of personal jurisdiction. The State N long-arm statute authorized the assertion of jurisdiction over the manufacturer. The only question is the constitutionality of the assertion of jurisdiction.

Should the court grant the manufacturer's motion to dismiss for lack of personal jurisdiction?
A. No, because the manufacturer is engaged in continuous and systematic activity in State N so substantial that it is constitutional for State N to assert jurisdiction over the manufacturer, even on a claim that did not arise out of the manufacturer's business in State N.
B. No, because the driver's claim is related to the manufacturer's activity in State N since it concerns a car designed by the manufacturer, and the manufacturer designs and manufactures other cars that are sold in State N.
C. Yes, because the driver's claim is unrelated to the manufacturer's purposeful availing activities in State N.
D. Yes, because the doctrine of forum non conveniens requires that the suit be brought in Country C, where the driver purchased the car in question.

Answer : C is correct. Because the driver's claim is unrelated the manufacturer's activity in State N, the court lacks personal jurisdiction over the manufacturer.
Convoluted question.
Rational is that since the car was purchased in country C, the claim arose out of contacts/transaction in country C, therefore State N has no jurisdiction. Had the car been purchased in State N, PJ would be proper. Logic - not foreseeable that car purchased in country C would result in claim in State N in another country. D is wrong because forum non conveniens would apply if State N would have Jurisdiction but a better jurisdiction would be Country C. Here State N has no Jurisdiction.

I too am having issues w/adaptibar's civpro qs. Wonder how actual mbe qs compare...

User avatar
Raiden

Bronze
Posts: 410
Joined: Wed Jul 25, 2012 8:11 pm

Re: Adaptibar CivPro

Post by Raiden » Sat Jun 18, 2016 3:56 pm

Adaptibar's civpro questions can be pretty ridiculous. But still should be practiced so that you can keep your mind thinking about the Civ Pro topics.

Get unlimited access to all forums and topics

Register now!

I'm pretty sure I told you it's FREE...


Post Reply Post Anonymous Reply  

Return to “Bar Exam Prep and Discussion Forum”