California PT advice Forum

[stella55]

Hi,

I'm taking BarBri and am struggling with their recommendations for outlining for the PT. I'm following their advice of typing everything out, outlining the law first, then the facts, then trying to match. But logistically, this has proven confusing and difficult. My points of law and facts end up being about 2 pages by the time I'm done with all of it and matching law to fact is so confusing.I am having a hard time remembering which points of law come from which case. It ends up being counterproductive and scattered; I'm constantly scrolling up and down my word document to try to tie things together. Does anyone have any recommendations for a streamlined way to approach the PT?

[rcharter1978]

Hi,

I'm taking BarBri and am struggling with their recommendations for outlining for the PT. I'm following their advice of typing everything out, outlining the law first, then the facts, then trying to match. But logistically, this has proven confusing and difficult. My points of law and facts end up being about 2 pages by the time I'm done with all of it and matching law to fact is so confusing.I am having a hard time remembering which points of law come from which case. It ends up being counterproductive and scattered; I'm constantly scrolling up and down my word document to try to tie things together. Does anyone have any recommendations for a streamlined way to approach the PT?

I didn't realize that Barbri even really had a method. I was successful using my tutor's issue sheets, and the matrix method in that PT book by Mary Ghallegar.

I think those two resources gave me the organizational structure I needed to not get lost.

I also don't think typing everything out is a great idea (at least not for me) I hand wrote the issue sheets, and the matrix in the PT book. That way I could type and have a resource to look back at.

The issue sheets and the matrix do a great job of tracking which law comes from which case.

[trojankid09]

how many pages is a passing PT, realistically?

barbri answer to the simulated PT was 11 pages long

[LurkerTurnedMember]

Hi,

I'm taking BarBri and am struggling with their recommendations for outlining for the PT. I'm following their advice of typing everything out, outlining the law first, then the facts, then trying to match. But logistically, this has proven confusing and difficult. My points of law and facts end up being about 2 pages by the time I'm done with all of it and matching law to fact is so confusing.I am having a hard time remembering which points of law come from which case. It ends up being counterproductive and scattered; I'm constantly scrolling up and down my word document to try to tie things together. Does anyone have any recommendations for a streamlined way to approach the PT?

Don't follow the Barbri method. Themis advises the same method, i.e., read the memo, then the library, outline the law, then the file and plug in the facts. But you've hit the nail on the head. When you read the library before you fully read the file, you really don't know what the PT is about. You don't know what the person really did, or what the person's concerns specifically are, what the initial outline you gathered from the memo is really about, etc. So when you're reading the library, you read a bunch of law and legal analysis in cases but you can't tell what's important and why. So you don't even really know what law or facts from the case to transfer over into your outline. Then, by the time you finish the library, you've got 3 or 4 cases all jumbled up in your head, their facts intertwined, and now you're starting to fully look at the file. At this point, you start getting the file confused with the cases, because there are about 5 or 6 fact patterns in your head at once. And you see all these facts in the file that trigger a particular law you just read a few minutes ago but alas you can't remember which case it was in, and what specific law. So after you get done with the file, you realize you've read the library and the file but everything is jumbled up and you're now flipping back and forth frantically trying to make some connection and sense of it all. A 3 hour assignment just turned into an 1.5 hour assignment because, let's face it, you just wasted an hour and a half reading without much effect.

That's why I do the opposite and my work on the PTs has been my strongest so far. I read the memo at the beginning to see what they want me to do and then immediately outline it in my answer exactly the way they want it. If they want 4 things, then I have 4 headings. If they wants two things with 3 subheadings in each, then that's how I outline it. Make sure you follow it to the letter. Then read through the file fully while keeping in mind the outline you just wrote down. The file will start filling out your understanding of what's at issue. If part of the outline asks something that can be answered merely from the file (i.e. explain the arguments made by both sides in this dispute), then you can fill those out right away as you read the file. If you get to a document in the file that explains the plaintiff's argument, for example, read it and then reword it over into the part of the outline asking for that. Once you've gone through the file fully and understand exactly what happened in the file/with the client, only then go to the library and start reading cases from oldest to most recent. The analysis in each case is usually broken down into sections (which might not be separated by formal headings). Usually, it's two big issues analyzed per case. While you read the issues, as soon as you finish reading about one issue and it's analysis in a case, write it out in your outline in the corresponding space (i.e. 'In X case, the court addressed X, Y, and Z. It held A. It reasoned a, b, and c.") Then go back to the case and read the rest. Once you get through another issue in the case, go back to the outline (this time likely at another place because it's a different issue) and fill it out. You go through all the cases like this and you should have about an hour left. At that point, it's time to just apply the caselaw to the facts. At this point, you already know what the file is about because you already read it fully at the beginning and that helped you keep it separate from all the cases. AND (this is the best part) you don't have to think about what case talks about what. They've all been explained and each specific issue has been explained where they needed to be explained in your outlined answer. Literally, all you now have to do is add a paragraph or two of application to each part/subpart and you're done. Does the subpart address, for example, plaintiff's argument regarding fraud? Great, you already have the rule at the top, with one or two cases cited and explained with respect to the fraud issue. Now just start applying the cases and rule to the facts. "As in X case, client here also did Y. And as in Z case, client do A. As such, blah." You should be done in time and your answer will end up good.

[SlowLearner]

Thanks for outlining your method - I am struggling with PT's and this step by step makes sense.

-I think my problem was starting with the library and stubbornly never tried starting with the file - (I always wanted a rule first ... but it became jumbled by the time i read the file and wasted time flipping back and forth.)

-I always wondered how to get time to properly reference a case and apply it - I knew what I wanted to do but always ran out of time... and your method gives me a chance to get this down.

So again, thanks for helping the rest of us facing into July!

[captainplanet]

Important tip: practice outlining using the same exact conditions you'll have on the day of the test. I took the CA bar last summer and I was practicing outlining in a Word doc and then doing the essay in a separate Word doc and looking at them side by side. But when you take the exam you'll just have 1 window to type in that looks like Microsoft Notes, and scratch paper. It really messed up my concentration to have to try to adjust on the spot.