Top Law Schools

Hello, I have a somewhat silly question.

If on the bar exam I am writing an essay and come across a rule with 3 elements but can only remember 2, would it be detrimental to still write "3) " and leave it blank after failing to come back to it later on in the exam to try to remember the last element? I'm unsure as to whether this would further draw attention to the fact that an element is missing--not that they would miss it anyway.

ckyo01 wrote:Hello, I have a somewhat silly question.

If on the bar exam I am writing an essay and come across a rule with 3 elements but can only remember 2, would it be detrimental to still write "3) " and leave it blank after failing to come back to it later on in the exam to try to remember the last element? I'm unsure as to whether this would further draw attention to the fact that an element is missing--not that they would miss it anyway.

This is a great question and there might be some more tidbits in the How To BS Essay topics thread: http://www.top-law-schools.com/forums/v ... 1&t=249162

But I would think for structure keep the 3) and try to fill in a placeholder "BS" element for the third and if you remember it you can come back and change it.

IF you neglect to put it there at all, not only do you draw attention to the fact its definitely blank, but it will be harder to scramble and go back and find that spot to put the 3rd element in if you do not have the structure pre-written there.

Also i would think attempting to fill in the 3rd is better than leaving it blank. It feels like purposefully leaving points on the board.

just my $.02

Curious to hear if anyone else has some better insight

I would either 1) make up an element or 2) not include a third element at all, I would not 3)

I am 100% going to make up an element instead of leaving it blank.

Heck, even writing "i know there's a third element but I can't recall" is better than blank.

I 100% did not know the six covenants of title in the Property essay this February. However, I stated I knew the seller owed the six, recited the ones I remembered and used the facts to show that he was probably in violation of the others as well.

Just remember it's actual people grading these exams, there's not like a computer looking for the exact black letter law to be perfect and to use the facts if you can. This essay scared me but I still passed!

Unrelated question to OP's post, but related to the thread:

On the MEE, do they tell you what subject is being tested? (kind of in the same sense that barbri provides the subject up top) Or do you have to make a guess based on the call of the question(s)? For some subjects, torts, civil procedure or con law, that would be relatively easy. But for others: contracts, corporations, agency and partnership, it's a lot harder.

maroon175 wrote:Unrelated question to OP's post, but related to the thread:

On the MEE, do they tell you what subject is being tested? (kind of in the same sense that barbri provides the subject up top) Or do you have to make a guess based on the call of the question(s)? For some subjects, torts, civil procedure or con law, that would be relatively easy. But for others: contracts, corporations, agency and partnership, it's a lot harder.

You have to guess based on what the questions are. You'll know if you've studied the subjects even a little. It is obvious when they are testing a torts essay versus a contracts essay.

Just make it up, write something.

Write the elements you know then use the fact pattern and how you think the outcome will be ( all elements met or not) to help you create the missing element for your rule statement. That way you get points for applying your rule to the facts of the problem.

The fact pattern can be a tremendous asset, as you will come to a conclusion in your mind and you just need to be sure that the rule of law you are discussing gets you to the answer( destination) that you want the grader( ie judge ) to arrive at.

While in actual practice you will have to find both the correct rule and caselaw, here you do not have either the luxury of research or time to do it, and the graders know that. They just want to see hat you can issue spot, find the “appropriate” rule of law and apply the facts as presented to that rule of law and come up with a logical conclusion based on all of the above.

Even if you are flat out wrong, if it looks like an attorney drafted it, and makes logical sense, you will get some points.

Obviously try to get it correct, but if you can’t, don’t freeze just use the facts that you have for the issue you spotted and go backwards (conclusion is... facts that support it... skip rule statement for a second... area of law go back to rule statement and come up with a rule/ test that fits the mold you just created...

Then forget it and move on to the next one.