Top Law Schools

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

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?

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.

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.

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!

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!

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.

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.

Who has good Civ Pro questions then?

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

not guilty wrote:I'm in need of Adaptibar discount code. Last one was invalid?

I just sent you a code. Check your inbox!

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!

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.

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...

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.