Predictions
I was just thinking about how Sakai wussed out on making predictions this year, and so I wanted to put up a predictions post. Some commenters got it started already in the previous post.
It goes without saying none of this is a guarantee or a promise. In fact, if you are planning on relying on a random blog posting for your last-minute Bar study, you are probably already up shit creek. Actually, you have already passed through the creek and are now in shit-water rapids, with shit Niagara Falls directly in front of you.
With that said, here's my order for the MBE subjects and multistate, from most likely to least likely, with a short explanation. Offer your own predictions, or check back in a week and mock me for getting it ass backwards.
MBE:
1) Evidence--they added CA law this year; it's only been tested 1 out of the last 3 (F07), and they have often tested it several years in a row. Look for something with a California distinction, and be sure to mention Prop 8, even if it's totally irrelevant to the question.
2) Crim Pro: Only 2 out of the last 5 years, albeit in F07. But that was a straight crim law question. Look out for a crim pro question this time around.
3) Torts: They have not been testing this as much recently.
4) Con Law: They never go more than 1 exam without testing Con Law, and they have tested it on the previous two. BUT, both were 1st Amendment questions. So if there is Con Law, expect it to be something else.
5) Contracts: This wasn't on F07, but it was on the previous FIVE exams. They have often skipped this on two exams or more in a row.
6) Property: This has been on the exam 4 out of the last 5 exams.
A couple notes: You always get at least 1 of Torts, Property, and Contracts. I also noticed that whenever there is Remedies (which is almost always), there is either Contracts or Torts, which makes sense, so expect one of those two, I think.
Multistate (note: I'm not bothering to include professional responsibility or remedies)
1) Community Property: Only 2 out of the last 6 years, and not the past two exams. Plus I HATE this subject, so it will definitely be on there.
2) Civ Pro: Added California, and has only been on there 1 time in 6 exams.
3) Wills & Trusts: One of these is almost always on there, usually as a cross-over. Trusts is more likely, as Wills was on F07. Maybe a cross-over with community property?
4) Corps & A/P: Has been on 4 of the past 5, despite not being tested heavily prior to that. A/P is a wild card, no way to know with it--here's a guess that it's a cross-over with Torts, if it's there.
So, I am fearlessly predicting: 1) Civ Pro, 2) Community Property, 3) Crim Pro, 4) Evidence, and 5) Torts. Not sure about the sixth one, but I predict Trusts, Remedies, and Professional Responsibility to be on there, as cross-overs or their own questions.
It goes without saying none of this is a guarantee or a promise. In fact, if you are planning on relying on a random blog posting for your last-minute Bar study, you are probably already up shit creek. Actually, you have already passed through the creek and are now in shit-water rapids, with shit Niagara Falls directly in front of you.
With that said, here's my order for the MBE subjects and multistate, from most likely to least likely, with a short explanation. Offer your own predictions, or check back in a week and mock me for getting it ass backwards.
MBE:
1) Evidence--they added CA law this year; it's only been tested 1 out of the last 3 (F07), and they have often tested it several years in a row. Look for something with a California distinction, and be sure to mention Prop 8, even if it's totally irrelevant to the question.
2) Crim Pro: Only 2 out of the last 5 years, albeit in F07. But that was a straight crim law question. Look out for a crim pro question this time around.
3) Torts: They have not been testing this as much recently.
4) Con Law: They never go more than 1 exam without testing Con Law, and they have tested it on the previous two. BUT, both were 1st Amendment questions. So if there is Con Law, expect it to be something else.
5) Contracts: This wasn't on F07, but it was on the previous FIVE exams. They have often skipped this on two exams or more in a row.
6) Property: This has been on the exam 4 out of the last 5 exams.
A couple notes: You always get at least 1 of Torts, Property, and Contracts. I also noticed that whenever there is Remedies (which is almost always), there is either Contracts or Torts, which makes sense, so expect one of those two, I think.
Multistate (note: I'm not bothering to include professional responsibility or remedies)
1) Community Property: Only 2 out of the last 6 years, and not the past two exams. Plus I HATE this subject, so it will definitely be on there.
2) Civ Pro: Added California, and has only been on there 1 time in 6 exams.
3) Wills & Trusts: One of these is almost always on there, usually as a cross-over. Trusts is more likely, as Wills was on F07. Maybe a cross-over with community property?
4) Corps & A/P: Has been on 4 of the past 5, despite not being tested heavily prior to that. A/P is a wild card, no way to know with it--here's a guess that it's a cross-over with Torts, if it's there.
So, I am fearlessly predicting: 1) Civ Pro, 2) Community Property, 3) Crim Pro, 4) Evidence, and 5) Torts. Not sure about the sixth one, but I predict Trusts, Remedies, and Professional Responsibility to be on there, as cross-overs or their own questions.
Labels: Bar Exams
posted by Max Power at 12:52 PM
18 Comments:
I believe Wills has been on the last 3 exams, so I'm betting no Wills. I like Civ Pro and I like Community Property (in the sense that I like their chances).
thoughts on what CA civpro would look like? there seems to be little testable stuff. PJ is the same as if it were a FRCP question. There is no SMJ issue. Everything else just seems really nitpicky.
funny note about boalt and the earthquake:
"At UC Berkeley's Boalt Hall library, there was also damage to some 19th century Swiss law books, which had their bindings ripped off when they fell alongside a few hundred other books on the sixth floor. The Louisiana state law section took a big hit as well."
o noes! not the 19th century swiss law books! i'm surprised anyone even noticed books falling over in the stacks.
good point, 2:05. After all, are they really going to try to catch you on the number of depositions in each? Maybe, they are bastards, but hopefully not.
It could be class actions. It could also be something about pleadings. I wouldn't be surprised by something combining pleadings with issue preclusion. For example, the question might make you go through some requirements in CA courts. Then there will be a later federal case, and it will ask if anything in the 2nd case is precluded. It's pretty easy to layer questions about pleadings, joinder of parties, etc., on top of that type of fact pattern.
Res judicata has Cal. law distinction. Also, community property was on the Feb. 07 exam as a crossover.
Good luck on the bar exam, everyone.
For those of you who saw Lt Cdr Kuelber and Maj Fleener speak at Boalt about representing Gitmo detainees, you might want to buy the new August edition of GQ (with Matt Damon on the cover), which features an extended article about them.
I like Max's predictions.
For what it is worth, these strike me as the most notable differences between federal and California procedure: notice v. code pleading; different special appearance rules, ie ways of waiving personal jurisdiction, venue, etc--remember in California that the motion to quash has to come in its own separate piece of paper before everything else; different ways of dealing with amending pleadigs to add a new party after the Statute of Limitations has run (learn the Doe defendant stuff, it's funky), different and broader standards for joinder of new parties by defendants; class actions (especially the fact that there is no b1-3 series and that notice is optional); no mandatory disclosure; corporate privilege differs; opinion workproduct absolute, for sure; 12 person juries required, but non unanimous OK; no requirement that you make DV motion to make JNOV motion; completely different approach (primary right) to claim preclusion, which can yield wildly different results, going either way. An interesting angle would be a judgment in a California state, or even better federal court, and then an interjurisdictional preclusion problem bringing the difference between the federal and state standards to the fore, a la Semtek, for civil procedure enthusiasts. I think that if they are going to examine on differences, the richest possibilities lie in waiver of jurisdictional defenses, amendment, maybe discovery, class actions, and claim preclusion.
Mmm, yes. Yes. Very impressive. But does he know mortgages?
Thanks Tom, I needed that.
Prof Bundy, I think you just scared the crap out of all of us.
Sorry, 8:47:
I didn't mean to scare, but to help reduce anxiety by focusing energies. The money line is the last:
I think that if they are going to examine on differences, the richest possibilities lie in waiver of jurisdictional defenses, amendment, maybe discovery, class actions, and claim preclusion.
As for mortgages, Tom, everything I know about the subject would fit on the head of a small pin (and that's after getting a lot of help from Nebraska's favorite trial lawyer in the making) so I'm kinda hoping they don't ask about them.
Last minute freakout--they will have power strips for all of our laptops? I don't have to rely on the dubious life of my battery?
8:47 here...
No problem Prof B. In fact, can't blame you for much at all since I can breeze so easily through most of the topic, thanks to your two classes. :) And I didn't even do that well in your classes!
There are some unfortunate other class at Boalt...PR with Cole anyone? What's this "conflict of interest" idea I keep seeing on the essays?
Professor Bundy's comment just got copied straight into my outline. This has got to be one of the most helpful N&B posts ever, even if the predictions don't pan out, as I am just too lazy to go through all the past essays myself and pick up the trends. Thanks Max et al.
any predictions for the performance test?
ummm, there will be a total of 2 of them, and you will get some facts, and some law, and then you will have to follow directions...?
Has anyone noticed that the July 2007 Bar Exam schedule we all received in the mail says laptop users must be seated by 8:15, the morning test will begin by 8:45 and the afternoon session's instructions will begin promptly at 1:45 and the exam will conclude each day by 5pm.
What happened to 9-12 and 1-4. I like the extra time for lunch, but I wish Barbri had told us the actual right times.
i think i would have preferred the 9-12 and 1-4. why do we need 2 hours for lunch? 8-5 is a long day, three days in a row. hell, they ought to start these tests at 10am.
you likely will not get out from the morning session on time because of all the laptop shutdown requirements. So the long lunch is a good thing on the first and third days.
And for the MBE, if you finish the morning part early, you can get out early and enjoy even more time strolling around trying to relax. Or working the cramps out of your fingers/hands/wrists.
Don't worry about it--starting tomorrow, the whole thing will be nearly over and that should provide you with some comfort if nothing else does.
Post a Comment
<< Home