I don't understand outlines

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."
kevinandre

New
Posts: 5
Joined: Sun May 10, 2020 11:22 pm

I don't understand outlines

Post by kevinandre » Thu Aug 13, 2020 10:14 pm

I am trying to prepare for the california bar and I got outlines from multiple sources but I don't understand them
I will give you an example. Constitutional law outline says mootness is blah blah. ripeness is blah blah.
ok how do I use that in an essay? In what situations does that come up?

don't get me started on all these stupid arrows. I have no idea why they don't use verbs and they just use arrows and somehow I am supposed to figure out what they mean.

What should I do? Any other resource you recommend?

User avatar
cavalier1138

Moderator
Posts: 7443
Joined: Fri Mar 25, 2016 8:01 pm

Re: I don't understand outlines

Post by cavalier1138 » Fri Aug 14, 2020 5:49 am

Not to be too harsh, but really? You've been through three years of law school, and you haven't learned how to apply a rule to facts?

In terms of readable outlines: Which program(s) are you using to study?

nixy

Gold
Posts: 2853
Joined: Fri Feb 16, 2018 8:58 am

Re: I don't understand outlines

Post by nixy » Fri Aug 14, 2020 8:05 am

Yeah, I didn’t use outlines much myself in school but you should still be able to use them effectively. Where the outline says “mootness is X, ripeness is Y,” you use that in a con law essay where someone wants to bring a suit alleging a constitutional violation. Based on the facts in the question, is the suit moot? Is it ripe? If the outline defines negligence as 1) breach 2) of a duty 3) that causes 4) damages, and you get a torts question, you look at the facts and figure out if there was a duty, was it breached, and did it cause damages. Etc. The outline is the black letter law you apply to the facts of a case.

rhs67858

New
Posts: 62
Joined: Sat Jan 30, 2016 4:42 pm

Re: I don't understand outlines

Post by rhs67858 » Fri Aug 14, 2020 11:17 am

4/10

User avatar
rcharter1978

Gold
Posts: 4740
Joined: Thu Aug 06, 2015 12:49 pm

Re: I don't understand outlines

Post by rcharter1978 » Fri Aug 14, 2020 4:03 pm

I wouldn't use outlines from multiple sources.

I think Barbri outlines are the best. Critical pass flashcards also explain black letter law pretty well, IMO.

If you need to know how to mimic a good essay and what a bad essay looks like you may want to try baressays or even the Barbri essay book, even though overall I think it's garbage but it'll give you a checklist.

This is a probable troll, but I think that the question could be relevant for someone else.

Want to continue reading?

Register now to search topics and post comments!

Absolutely FREE!


kevinandre

New
Posts: 5
Joined: Sun May 10, 2020 11:22 pm

Re: I don't understand outlines

Post by kevinandre » Sun Aug 16, 2020 12:54 am

cavalier1138 wrote:
Fri Aug 14, 2020 5:49 am
Not to be too harsh, but really? You've been through three years of law school, and you haven't learned how to apply a rule to facts?

In terms of readable outlines: Which program(s) are you using to study?
the problem is not that I can't apply the rule
the problem is that I don't even understand the rule when I read it in the outline
for example, it says

Mootness – when a dispute has ended or was resolved before review.
− Exceptions → (a) case is capable of being repeated but escapes review; (b) voluntary cessation, but it can resume any time; OR (c) class actions, where at least one member has an ongoing injury.

So mootness is when a dispute has ended or was resolved before review. so what? why should I care about this? They are not going to ask me "what is mootness?" on the exam.

"Exceptions"
exceptions to what? When you have an exception, you must have a rule. Where is the rule?

User avatar
cavalier1138

Moderator
Posts: 7443
Joined: Fri Mar 25, 2016 8:01 pm

Re: I don't understand outlines

Post by cavalier1138 » Sun Aug 16, 2020 7:41 am

Honest question (because I just realized the potential significance of you prepping for the CA bar): Did you go to law school?

nixy

Gold
Posts: 2853
Joined: Fri Feb 16, 2018 8:58 am

Re: I don't understand outlines

Post by nixy » Sun Aug 16, 2020 8:07 am

On the tiny chance this isn’t a troll: you identified the rule. The rule is that a controversy is moot when a dispute has ended or been resolved before review. That matters when you get a question that begins, “Party A wants to sue Party B for [whatever],” gives you facts about the suit, and asks you if A could succeed. One of the first things you’d need to consider is whether A’s claim can go forward (Is it ripe? Is it moot?). You need to know the exceptions because when you’re figuring out whether someone’s claim is moot, the facts they give you might involve an action that could be repeated but escapes review, or voluntary cessation, or a class action.

Now obviously if the question asks about criminal charges that could be brought in a particular situation, mootness won’t be relevant. But you still have to learn it so you can address the first kind of question if it comes up.

User avatar
rcharter1978

Gold
Posts: 4740
Joined: Thu Aug 06, 2015 12:49 pm

Re: I don't understand outlines

Post by rcharter1978 » Sun Aug 16, 2020 9:08 am

cavalier1138 wrote:
Sun Aug 16, 2020 7:41 am
Honest question (because I just realized the potential significance of you prepping for the CA bar): Did you go to law school?
Assuming this isn't a troll I'd wonder the same thing.

OP - based on your response above...if this isn't a troll.....you seriously need to get professional grade study materials.

You don't need multiple outlines that people are emailing you. Sounds like someone sent you some lean sheets or something like that. You need the conviser, which has more readable outlines.

You also really really need some essay materials so you understand how various issues, rules and exceptions come up in an essay question. I hated barbris essay book, but I think that would be a good starting resource for you.

If you don't know how mootness would come up in an essay than it doesn't seem like you know how to apply rules and exceptions.

The barbri essay book gives a sample essay question, a sample answer and a checklist so you can see which issues are addressed in the question and how they are handled in the sample answer.

I still think that this has to be a troll. I don't see how this isn't a troll. For your sake, I hope this is a troll. If this isn't a troll, I don't know man....this just has to be a troll.

Want to continue reading?

Register for access!

Did I mention it was FREE ?


User avatar
a male human

Partner
Posts: 2208
Joined: Tue Mar 31, 2009 2:42 pm

Re: I don't understand outlines

Post by a male human » Tue Aug 18, 2020 6:22 pm

Learn how they work by using (trying to use) them. Study the sample answers. Get those "ohh" moments.

User avatar
zeglo

Silver
Posts: 688
Joined: Sat Nov 28, 2015 9:42 pm

Re: I don't understand outlines

Post by zeglo » Sat Aug 22, 2020 11:34 am

You check each issue down a list. Mention anything remotely relevant and the outcome.

1. Is it moot? Yes/no
2. Is it ripe? Yes/no
3. Is there standing? Yes/no
4. Is x right violated? Yes/no

Etc.

Register now!

Resources to assist law school applicants, students & graduates.

It's still FREE!


Post Reply Post Anonymous Reply  

Return to “Bar Exam Prep and Discussion Forum”