Top Law Schools

Keep the talk to areas of law, not specific fact patterns or answer choices.


**Please be advised that discussion or solicitation (including, but not limited to, PMs and online chatrooms) of any questions or answers from the recent bar examinations with anything more than an extremely broad level of specificity will result in a temporary or permanent ban. This may include a permanent ban on your IPs if necessary, which will block you from even viewing the TLS forums. Permanent IP address bans for bar question discussion have been issued in the past.

I, of course, know why there is a rule about being too specific about certain fact patterns, but can you explain why for those who may be dumber than me?

Because you sign something on the exam affirming that you won't take the MBE materials out of the exam room.

It's just like the LSAT, they want to protect their IP.

First half wasn't bad. Easier than Feb's first half. I think the second half will be a nightmare.

Second half actually seemed a touch easier than the first half. Maybe because mornings aren't my forte. All in all feeling mostly alright about it -- I think Themis sample questions and areas of concentration were very good. (For future readers -- I thought their essay feedback sucked, but the actual essays/sample questions and the MBE stuff was A+ and I'd recommend 'em).

NoLongerALurker wrote:Second half actually seemed a touch easier than the first half.

Ha, this wasn't my impression at all.

Congrats on the Brooklyn Law School 2015 Moot Court Competition problem writers for giving me an easy 2 questions.

I thought the afternoon was awful. Morning was fine.

FYI there are two sections of the MBE - one "easy" one hard. They switch them up among test takers so some will get the hard portion in the morning while the rest get the easy and vice versa. so just cuz someone else thought it was easy in the afternoon and you didn't doesn't mean you're fuhked

Yea. I thought they were relatively fine. About what I expected, although more judgement calls than barbri lead me to believe.

Anyone else get a SHIT TON of "d" answers in one of their collums? Plz.

I thought the afternoon was brutal. Lots of stuff I'd never even seen with BarBri. So glad it's over, but no confidence in having passed. I guess we'll wait and see.

generaltoast wrote:Anyone else get a SHIT TON of "d" answers in one of their collums? Plz.

yes

SLS_AMG wrote:I thought the afternoon was brutal. Lots of stuff I'd never even seen with BarBri. So glad it's over, but no confidence in having passed. I guess we'll wait and see.

I also thought a lot of the Barbri predictions about topics that "we have to talk about, but really won't be tested" were proven wrong today.

generaltoast wrote:Anyone else get a SHIT TON of "d" answers in one of their collums? Plz.

Yeah

I ended up changing like the fifth D to something else largely because the pattern bothered me too much

Found the AM session extremely easy while the afternoon not so much... (I think) I'm glad I used Adaptibar.. When will we know if we passed?

I also think part of my feeling re: PM session was that I was just so mentally exhausted. I could have gotten a lot of questions right that I wasn't sure about, but who knows? I feel like with shorter sets I go through sort of a checklist of considerations before deciding on an answer. During the afternoon, I just didn't have the energy, and was often picking answers that looked/sounded right based on my read-through and rule knowledge but that could have been traps.

generaltoast wrote:Anyone else get a SHIT TON of "d" answers in one of their collums? Plz.

Yup. And not enough A's at all.

Honestly, just blown away by how off target Barbri was about pretty much every part about this exam except the MPT. They could not have done a worse job emphasizing what's important and what's not. Civ Pro- they were completely off. Con Law- good thing we did so much first amendment right? Evidence- MBE was Harder. Contracts- i'm unsure about. Torts- thought was fair. Crim- Barbri needs to reevaluate this subject completely.

But they won't change, they'll keep producing a subpar product and billing firms and people who don't know any better. Aren't they planning on using these same materials for the February 2017 test?

Really I can't remember a time where I thought a service was so inferior to what was promised. I mean they make law school look like the bargain of a life time.

Sorry for the venting, hope everyone got through it okay and did well! Want nothing more than the people who put the time in to get a passing score.

SLS_AMG wrote:I thought the afternoon was brutal. Lots of stuff I'd never even seen with BarBri. So glad it's over, but no confidence in having passed. I guess we'll wait and see.

There was a particular area of the Crim Pro questions that came out of nowhere for me.

ucc2207 wrote:Honestly, just blown away by how off target Barbri was about pretty much every part about this exam except the MPT. They could not have done a worse job emphasizing what's important and what's not. Civ Pro- they were completely off. Con Law- good thing we did so much first amendment right? Evidence- MBE was Harder. Contracts- i'm unsure about. Torts- thought was fair. Crim- Barbri needs to reevaluate this subject completely.

But they won't change, they'll keep producing a subpar product and billing firms and people who don't know any better. Aren't they planning on using these same materials for the February 2017 test?

Really I can't remember a time where I thought a service was so inferior to what was promised. I mean they make law school look like the bargain of a life time.

Sorry for the venting, hope everyone got through it okay and did well! Want nothing more than the people who put the time in to get a passing score.

Could not agree more

Thought the afternoon was a little harder than morning.

Overall I didn't think the questions were far off from Barbri's.

ucc2207 wrote:Honestly, just blown away by how off target Barbri was about pretty much every part about this exam except the MPT. They could not have done a worse job emphasizing what's important and what's not. Civ Pro- they were completely off. Con Law- good thing we did so much first amendment right? Evidence- MBE was Harder. Contracts- i'm unsure about. Torts- thought was fair. Crim- Barbri needs to reevaluate this subject completely.

But they won't change, they'll keep producing a subpar product and billing firms and people who don't know any better. Aren't they planning on using these same materials for the February 2017 test?

Really I can't remember a time where I thought a service was so inferior to what was promised. I mean they make law school look like the bargain of a life time.

Sorry for the venting, hope everyone got through it okay and did well! Want nothing more than the people who put the time in to get a passing score.

I couldn't find some of the relevant MEE answers even while actively looking for them. It's a weird comfort to be like "there was zero chance I was ever going to be able to find out that that's the relevant law."

Wait so did we not all get the sections in the same order or is there just disagreement as to which section was harder? My afternoon section seemed noticeably easier.