July 2009 Bar Exam Thread
We've now filled up a couple different threads worth of comments. So here's the one that takes us through this wonderful week.
Piggy-backing off a comment finishing the last thread:
So, can we start talking about Day-Of considerations?
Piggy-backing off a comment finishing the last thread:
So, can we start talking about Day-Of considerations?
- what's going in your plastic bag?
- two pillows? no pillows?
- secret food strategies?
- what are you going to do with a 90-120 minute lunch?
- apres-test drinks on Tuesday?
Labels: Bar Exams
posted by tj at 12:12 AM
201 Comments:
Good luck, everyone!
one final community property question...
How do Lucas/Anti-Lucas apply when a couple owns as joint tenants with right of survivorship? Thanks!
On death, Lucas applies. Any SP that was used to acquire the JTWROS will be presumed a gift. The surviving spouse's ROS will kick in and they'll get the house.
On divorce, anti-lucas applies. So, it's presumptively CP, but any SP contributions to the property are considered an interest-free loan from that spouse's SP to be reimbursed upon the divorce.
Some general observations about Examsoft, for those who have not used it before.
For Windows XP users, at least, it helps to disable automatic updates, the Microsoft narration tool, and anything else that starts up automatically. These background apps can cause Examnsoft to be behave erratically (e.g. typing/backspacing is slow, cursor freezes periodically) as the apps try to launch and Examsoft attempts to shut them down. You can disable automatic updates by clicking the shield in the bottom-right corner of your screen. Also, use cut & paste sparingly; it works most of the time, but is not a perfect science.
Very best luck to everyone!
Paralyzed student barred from California bar exam: paid with check instead of credit card
http://www.sacbee.com/topstories/story/2054829.html
Definitely turn automatic updates off for boot camp users using Vista.
I was using exam soft, and the auto-update restarted the computer without asking me. By the time I realized what had happened, I was starting up in OSX. This required a restart into windows, and then another restart into windows to get in examsoft mode.
That would be pretty panic-inducing on the actual exam.
Good luck everyone, we're almost there!
Haha, from the headline I just assumed student was paralyzed by FEAR.
may be a stupid question, but if fed gov can't prevent discrimination (ignoring 13th amendment) by private people, how does the ADA (americans with disabilities act) have force? how do they require all those buildings to be wheelchair accessible?
Commerce clause. Same as the 1964 Civil Rights Act.
As I understand it, the ADA only regulates places of public accommodation.
Without knowing for sure, I would venture to guess that its authorized as a regulation of interstate commerce.
I can't believe I'm taking computer advice from a mac user. ;)
Can anyone please help a computer imbecile figure out how to disable automatic updates in Vista?
start ==> control panel => system & maintenance => windows update turn automatic updating on or off
click the radio button "never check for updates"
hit "ok"
that's it
remember to turn it back on after the bar.
I finally took a look at the info pamphlet that came with the admittance ticket, big FYI to everyone out there:
It says to be at your seat by 8:15am each morning for laptop users (8:25am for those who are writting).
That was definitely earlier than I was thinking I had to be there.
Oh, and is anyone else taking the bar in Sacramento? Or am I the one and only?
If you are, I plan on heading straight to Brew It Up (a block or two away from the Convention Center) for a beer at 5:15 on Thursday.
2:13 -- fabulous. thank you for responding.
-- 1:42
I tried disabling automatic update in Vista, but it won't let me ... it says I have to be a system administrator. I don't get it. Nobody uses my laptop but me :-(
Sorry to burden you with more computer questions, but these tales about examsoft are making me very nervous, and I just converted my mac to Windows XP so this is all new territory to me. I think I turned off automatic updates but when I start up the computer I still get this pop up thing where the "shield" is on the bottom right corner that says "you might be at risk . . ." Does anyone know how to turn that off?
Also, I am confused about how and when we upload our answers. . .
You can't turn off the shield. The fact that it's red and telling you that you might be at risk is an indication that you've successfully de-activated auto-update. Don't stress about it.
You can upload your answers after the conclusion of any of the days. So you can upload answers to Q1-3 and PT1 at the end of Day 1, 2, or 3. But you MUST upload all answers by the end of Day 3. Easiest way to handle this would be to just pay the stupid hotel fee for WIFI and upload immediately after each day. You should get instructions from the proctors at the end of the day. If you don't get them - ask.
I've also been told that sometimes, the first upload attempt can fail (as well as the 2nd, 3rd, 4th, etc.). This is because 8000 other people are trying to upload at the same time, and of course examsoft's servers aren't always up to the task. Don't stress. Just keep trying.
Oh so you don't upload right then and there in the classroom? Then couldn't people just go and change their answers later?
One quick substantive question:
For the crime of conspiracy, the traditional rule is that there is no conspiracy if the other party is acquitted, since there is no one to conspire with. The MPC says a defendant can be convicted regardless of whether the other parties have all been acquitted or only feigning agreement.
I think Barbri's MBE questions go with the traditional rule, and I think PMBR goes with the MPC rule.
Anyone know which rule we're supposed to use for the bar?
About Auto-Updates - if you can't disable it, check the time that it is set to update. The default is 3am, so it won't be a problem. For people who installed Berkeley's security package, I think it locks you out of being able to switch AutoUpdate off.
7/26/2009 9:53 AM: You can disable the shield by double clicking the shield, clicking "change how security center alerts me" and unchecking all boxes. You probably don't need to do this though.
7/26/2009 5:15 PM: Because most people are not elite hax0rs who can edit the encrypted answer files. If you have these chops, then why aren't you out siphoning fractions of a penny from every bank transaction everywhere?
anyone with experience know what the deal is about medication?
I need to take some pills before and after lunch, and only now realized, after looking at the bar exam site, that I might not be allowed to bring them into the test center. I was planning to BART it, but if I can't take them in, I'll have to drive and leave them in the car.
The instructions specifically say you can bring pills.
I didn't realize the files were encrypted -- does that mean if your computed crashed and you try to open your doc again you won't be able to?
No idea... have you tried turning off your computer in the middle of the practice exam and rebooting? What happens?
Relax about the software. It's not great, but it does work the way it's supposed to. You specifically select "End Exam" when you're done taking it -- I don't believe a crash will cause the exam file to be permanently closed off.
Just a note....Don't put your computer in sleep mode (i.e. closing the lid) while examsoft is still running. Sleep mode is often buggy in Windows and my laptop crashed. After that examsoft wouldn't start at all and I had to call Examsoft for help.
So: Bring (1) admittance ticket; (2) drivers license; (3) pencils and pens; (4) analog watch; (5) a lunch in case you can't find something to buy; (6) your laptop.
And leave the cell at home.
I miss anything?
I guess we'll be leaving our lunch in some other room outside? No clear plastic bag rule on that, I imagine...
(7) power cord for your laptop!
Don't forget the swimming goggles -- or whatever that weird reference is to -- oh and earplugs, unless you are like me and find the notion of sticking something in your ear utterly repugnant.
Backup battery/power cord, if you have it.
I'm at Oakland, and do not anticipate any trouble reaching the dozens of Chinese restaurants nearby.
Is a pillow useful, or a pain to lug around?
And do we keep the same seats for morning and afternoon? Can we/should we leave things in the room?
To the person asking about conspiracy:
If the question says "common law conspiracy," use the traditional rule. If it says MPC, use the MPC rule.
To Kathleen:
An alum told me that she was assigned a seat on the first day, and it was her seat for the entire bar exam. This was down in the Ontario testing center, however, so I don't know if this is standard procedure everywhere, or just something they did at her test center.
Sorry, can't help you with the pillows question.
To everyone:
Just a clarification about how exam answer uploading works. You'll close out of examsoft and leave. Once you are back in your room or home, start-up your computer and connect to the internet. Examsoft should automatically detect that you're connected to the internet, tell you it has detected some exam answers to up load, and will ask you if you'd like to upload them. Don't be worry if the upload doesn't succeed the first time - it's not uncommon. Just keep trying.
You have the same seat the whole time, at all of the test centers. You can leave things at your seat. In fact, the vast majority of people leave their laptop and power cord. That is by far the safest thing to do, just leave it there. It'll be there when you get back.
Whoa. Wow. The instruction memo explicitly SAYS that you will occupy the same seat during the entire exam. It also SAYS you can bring medication in. It does NOT say that the exam answer must be uploaded by the end of the last day but actually noon on Friday. Based on some of the mis-statements here, I'd suggest those reading this (and also those writing the comments) consider actually READING all the info the state bar sent to you to avoid a rotten surprise.
In addition to the stuff TJ mentioned, I'm taking some headache medicine and a little cash for soda machines that I hope to find. Also a sweatshirt in case of over-air conditioning. And I am taking that swimmer's plastic--I found it when I went looking for ear plugs at Target--it's essentially a ball of wax that covers your ear-hold instead of going inside it. I'd never heard of it before but it's more comfortable IMO.
I'm putting it all in a grocery store canvas bag that I'm willing to lose to a thief.
I know we're not supposed to bring our cellphones, but really? If I turn it off, what are they going to do, frisk us all? They also don't say that we can bring keys in, but I'm assuming they're not going to be keyblock us.
Oh, and to reiterate from an earlier comment: earplugs are recommended because there is so much keyboard clacking. I guess it's no different than an in-class exam.
You really can't live without your cell phone for 8 hours?
@9:16, I wouldn't even screw around with bringing in a turned off cellphone if you can.
The instructions explicitly list "carrying unauthorized items into the examination room" as grounds for giving notice to the Committee of Bar Examiners and, in some cases "dismissal from the examination test center." Even with my phone off, I would still be to nervous there would be an inadvertent "beep." But, hey, it's your career. (this would be the point at which I would insert a smiley face emoticon to show that I was being sarcastic, but I despise those things)
I sometimes set my alarm in my cell phone to remind me about street sweeping or a week ahead of birthdays. And even if it's turned off it will like still come on by itself and beep. Even if it's on vibrate. And once I got a new cell phone and removed the SIM card and everything and that thing would just keep beeping at random intervals in the closet. We thought the place was haunted until the battery went dead months later. Ever since then, I have less confidence in my ability to ever completely silence my cell phone.
Yes and if someone's cell phone makes any noise during the exam I swear to god you will not want to be at all near me because your fact pattern on battery will become a reality. There is nothing more irksome than a cell phone making noise during a test. If you can't live without a cell phone for a few hours, then you need to reassess your very existence.
Were any alumni in LA at the Hyatt? I searched online to see if I could find anyone describing the scene in a blog, but there are too many articles about the chandeliers swinging during the earthquake. I've gleaned we're in ballrooms with a gazillion people. I was wondering if anyone remembers whether the seats were uncomfortable enough to merit a pillow. That's what the pillows are for, right? Or any other advice you might have.
How much would someone have to pay your to skip the bar exam?
http://volokh.com/archives/archive_2009_07_26-2009_08_01.shtml#1248671477
I'd skip it for about 20 bucks at this point. Enough money to get me drunk enough to forget this torturous experience.
Some lunchtime advice: Instead of eating at places where other stressed out exam takers are, eat something quickly and then schedule a "conjugal visit" with your boyfriend, girlfriend, or whoever to clear your head for the afternoon session. Exercise (i.e. running around the block a few times, stairs, etc.) works too.
Re: the analog watch thing. BarBri NY said you are allowed to have digital watches -- so long as they aren't "programmable." So I think it's ok.
Another computer question. I know that if your computer crashes you can restart and Exam Soft will bring you back into your exam, you just loose the last 60 seconds of work and whatever time it takes to restart.
But, if your computer crashes and you CAN'T get it to restart, what then? I assume you just need to grab a pen and start writing, but can you turn in a writing AND upload your partial answer and have them combine the two files? Can you at least do that per individual questions?
Thanks.
It's my understanding that, yes, your work is stored on your hard drive somewhere that the Committee can eventually find it. I'm pretty certain the Barbri people said that and when I was at McGeorge as a 1L, we used ExamSoft and that was what they told us to do as well. So you shouldn't have to rewrite anything that was already written on the computer.
As for the second part, yeah, just start writing and try not to let it throw you off.
what are people up to today? half study? light review all day? day off?
I filled my iPod with nothing but Rammstein songs to pump me up, think they'd let me bring it in with me if I can prove that there really is nothing but Rammstein on there?
I'm even willing to just listen to Du Hast on repeat for six hours if it'll make it easier to prove there's no contraband on there.
Light studying today ... going over the elements throughout the day.
I'm going to visit the exam site and buy a watch.
From an alum: It's a good idea to bring a watch. The examsoft software can mess with the computer's clock. I knew numerous people who said their clocks slowed (i.e. they got the 10 min warning and thought there were 20 min left). Just a normal wristwatch should be fine, just don't expect your computer clock to function with examsoft running.
This thread is making ME nervous, and I passed the CA bar last year!
i'm sure someone has answered this on one of the threads before, but i can't find answers:
1) can you bring your laptop case? (do they let you bring it into the test, or is there a safe place to leave it outside the room)?
2) where do you put computers during lunch?
3) is there anywhere outside the test to store lunches/bags, etc?
thanks everyone and good luck! this thread has been really helpful....
1) can you bring your laptop case? - I think you leave it with your bag outside the test room (I wrapped mine in a towel since I don't have a fancy laptop case)
2) where do you put computers during lunch? If I recall correctly, they stay in the testing room.
3) is there anywhere outside the test to store lunches/bags, etc? - You can leave your stuff outside the testing room. At the Oakland Convention Center (and probably all other testing sites) they have banquet tables with water coolers set up on them in the hallway outside the testing room, and everyone sticks their bags under the tables.
Also, be prepared to enter the testing room at the Oakland Convention Center. It's a *giant* armory room with folding tables and chairs, and really bright lights.
if we have to be seated at 8:15, what time are we walking up to the building?
does check-in take a while? does arriving at 7:50 or so do the job? (don't want to be there too early...)
thanks
I checked out the Oakland Convention Center while they were setting it up.
It's HUGE. Concrete floor, high rafters like a warehouse or hanger. ECHOES. BUZZING lights. No clock that I could see.
For those that took the SF Live course - it's at least twice as big as the St. Mary's venue.
That said, anyone up for an Arrested Development marathon?
"Take a good look, because this is the last time you're gonna see THESE!
SPRING BREAK! WOO!!"
Never promise crazy a baby.
Is a hearsay statement by the victim a party admission in a criminal trial?
No. Victims are not parties in criminal cases. You have to find another way of getting it in.
And at this point, there's not much value in dwelling on minutia. Rest, gather your energies, and focus on bigger picture stuff. The three day exam is really about endurance by the time that third day rolls around.
Anyone feel like giving me a pep talk? I made the mistake of taking a practice MBE yesterday morning. Granted, I was very groggy and had not had coffee/breakfast, but I got 61/100. I'm worried that's a below passing score. Plus I can't keep rule statements straight. Help! I am worried I will fail. :(
12:32: you and everyone else, re: rule statements. if you looked at the sample answers on the website, some are impressive, but many had badly phrased or even incorrect statements.
with respect to the MBE score, that's clearly still a passing score. remember, the scores are scaled. so a 61 is not like 122, more like 140.
If I remember correctly, a 137 RAW on the MBE was the threshold mark on one administration a couple years back ... at least that's what the Barbri handout said.
But that doesn't sound right ... 67.5% RAW was barely passing?
Please tell me Barbri was mistaken, and that they were referring to scaled scores and not raw scores.
I chose to ignore everything after the reference to Arrested Development and really hope Bob Loblaw ends up on an essay fact pattern.
"Why should you go to jail for a crime someone else noticed?"
Barbri can't be talking about 137 raw as a passing score, b/c the handout said b/t 125-130 is considered passing as a RAW score. Then again, candidates tend to pick up around 10 pts due to throwing out experimentals, qs with multiple correct answers, and poorly written test questions that everyone gets credit for. I know at least that I was getting what BarBri says you are "supposed to get" before the MPRE but my scaled score was SUBSTANTIALLY above the minimum cut off.
According to Barbri's handout,
Passing RAW score for the following years was:
Feb. 2006: 137
July 2004: 136
July 2006: 134
WTF? Can this be right?
Do we really get additional points for the experimental questions? I didn't think we did.
do we get our own little folding table or are we seated next to other test takers. if the latter, then exactly how much free space will we have to type, write, place our zip lock, etc.?
You get your own folding table.
As long as you bring your own.
And it fits inside your plastic bag.
And it's no more than 4 x 4 inches.
And by "folding table," I mean, "analog clock."
do we get our own little folding table or are we seated next to other test takers. if the latter, then exactly how much free space will we have to type, write, place our zip lock, etc.?
No, there are rows of shared folding tables (think banquet tables), but you will have ample space to place your laptop and assorted tools. You aren't squished in.
1:34,
there are two test takers to each 6 footish long folding table. The tables are in long rows of thirty people, but the are two aisles (so there is a long table with ten people at it, then aisle, then ten more people, then aisle, then 10 more people).
Also, for those debating bringing pillows, the chairs are like the ones at I-house for barbri (so padded, but not soft).
All this info is for Oakland.
Please stop freaking out passing raw scores. Keep in mind: how substantially do you think the scaled pass line changes from year to year on the MBE? Not much, right? Thus, if the pass line was 128 raw last year, but 137 raw 4 years ago, it's probably because last year's exam was just harder than the one 4 years ago. It's certainly more plausible than the alternatives, which are (1) they made the test substantially easier or (2) people were substantially better test-takers 4 years ago.
Relax - everything's going to be ok.
People people! Please stop with the raw scores business. You are stressing everyone out. And what good will it do you now?! Will knowing the raw score is 5 points more than you thought make you do better? NO. It will likely make you do worse.
Relax everyone. The raw score cutoffs barbri refers to are clear pass marks (scoring significantly above 1440 scaled). The raw score you'll need to get the equivalent of 1440 scaled is several points lower.
Don't worry too much folks! Good luck!!!!
Hi everyone,
Last summer, I took a practice MBE from Barbri the day before the exam, and I ended up with only 45/100. It totally destroyed my confidence. I was really worried, especially since I had averaged just 4-5 hours a day of studying.
But guess what: I passed, and I'm not a strong writer at all.
You ALL know much more than you need to pass. This is totally doable! Believe me!
Best of luck to you all.
What is the raw score required to pass the Charms OWLS?
May the force be with you, young Jedi masters.
Last year, I didn't answer any of the MBE's, or any of the essays, or for that matter any of the PT's. And yet I passed. So don't you worry.
Last year Malfoy cast a Confundus charm on me and I still passed!
YEAH BOALTIES!!! WE CAN DO IT!!
I know we can bring in a pillow but is it okay to wear a leopard print snuggie? Just wonderin'...
wtf was up with the CA PT? Were we supposed to do the undisputed facts + memo beginning with undisputed facts, or were we supposed to just do undisputed facts + persuasive memo?
how do they not read the directions before using these problems?
You're freaking me out. I thought it was clear they wanted 1) Statement of Facts, 2) Persuasive Brief.
Although... I only had like 9 facts, and none of them were really undisputed. I feel like I should have done more practice PTs... were we supposed to do it like a WOA brief?
It said NOT to include a statement of facts in the motion, so I just did the UF and then a MPA. Dunno, talking about it now is rather pointless/stress inducing.
Then why'd you bring it up? You don't need two statement's of facts, that is dumb.
God, I can't get my heart to stop pounding. And it's been over for an hour and a half.
And I only did one statement of facts too. Don't think they wanted it twice.
I made the mistake of saying something about how I wasn't sure if I wrote enough undisputed facts. And the girl next to me asked me how many and I said, "like 12." And she said, "Oh. I wrote 22."
I hate the bar exam.
There were not 22 undisputed *material* facts. I'd bet a lot you get a better score on that section than the girl with 22. I had 12 too.
Don't let it get to you. The directions said "material" undisputed facts.
Maybe I missed some stuff, but I didn't have anywhere near 22, and I don't see how you could have 22 MATERIAL undisputed facts unless you drew them up ridiculously narrowly.
Plus those suckers were tedious to write out. Doing 22 probably took a fair amount of time away from the substantive motion, which I imagine was worth more.
Cheer up, you did fine! Now focus on getting to bed early to be well-rested for tomorrow :)
Question, and sorry if people hate rehashing the exam. For the first essay, was there some Civ Pro in there since it was a motion to dismiss for failure to state a claim?
Yeah, I agree. 22 undisputed facts is outlandish. I think I had 10 or 11 by the time it was over.
Love my boalties.. I had 9 undisputed facts and thought of throwing some mor down but I think it was a stretch to even say that 9 were actually admitted
civ pro I just said something about notice / ultimate facts and listened to the call of the question
Bad day for me ... very bad day. It was all nerves. I didn't finish one of the essays, and I think I probably got a 55 on the PT.
I felt like crying after the test ... I still feel like crying.
Wow ! It's nice to see people in the same boat ! I saw Civ Pro in the first question then freaked out because how much can you seriously write on that motion so I went into some Strict Liability analysis - I hated today! Performance exam was insane
7:41 -
You'll be fine. Remember, we're graded on a curve, and so your scores are relative to how everyone else does. A girl next too me told me that she doesn't really understand what strict liability means.
It's all about staying focused and keeping at it. It's a marathon.
So is the short civ pro in the first essay enough that people think we won't see civ pro again on Thursday?
don't cry! let the bar examiners decide what score you get, its not up to you! just do your best at every, and look to the future. there's still plenty of exam left to rip it up. do it!
Take a deep breath, relax, and remember, it's a marathon, not a sprint.
You will survive.
Last summer we had this out of left field con law question that no one saw coming (about executive power, I think you guys probably practiced it). EVERYONE came out of there and said WTF? EVERYONE made something up. I sounded like our esteemed professor Y*o, writing something ridiculous like the president can do whatever he wants to protect the country from terrorism. The only reason I did it was because it seemed like the easy way out, easier to write. I passed. And everyone I talked to who said WTF on that one passed, too.
So PLEASE don't worry about one question, especially if a lot of people are saying they were stumped or did something wrong. It really is a curve.
You know what I could really go for right about now? A couple hundred fact patterns. Maybe top that off with eight hundred eerily similar answer choices.
maaaan, i didn't see that civ pro question at all. i was like oooh, torts! i can do torts! i just did strict liability and malicious prosecution and moved on. now, i love no one is talking about that third essay that had my head spinning.
we all have to stay positive and know that it's all relative. you did bad today? kick ass tomorrow and the next day. we can do it. we've worked so hard!!
Yea I pretty much did torts after defining a motion to dismiss- that was a real random curve ball ! Hopefully the graders have some strict liability in their answer key. Ca evidence was long ! Totally ran out of time at the end. The performance exam just gave me a giant headache. All thAt barbri talk about headings went out the window and I just rambled on ugh
Well a point against Boalties: today I came out of the essay exam where I totally didn't have time to finish the last question, and one Boaltie -- who has never bothered to say hello to me once in our 3-year career together -- came and sat down next to me and my friend (we were trying to avoid law students talking about the exam) -- and decided to volunteer that he finished an hour early. I think I did an eye roll with my entire body.
You know who you are -- please don't sit down next to me again tomorrow.
I think all you had to do was a quick mention of motion to dismiss for failure to state a claim, and then it affected the burden of proof. But the bulk of the essay was definitely torts and strict liability. I'm sure everyone is fine.
I looked at the call of the first question at least 3 times trying to figure out if it was civ pro or torts and then said eff it ill do both thinking i had it in the bag. No worries except for five minutes later when it dawned on me about why the fuck are they asking about malicious prosecution in a civil case...moved on.
Saw the second question - PR nice!! got through it. Feeling pretty good got exactly 1 hour left.
Turn the page and saw SIX EFFIN evidence interrogatories. Put my head down and started hammering away. Good effort. The first 2 or three rogs probably will get the grader excited. Then he/she will find the crap answers for the last three. I hate those bar fuckers for putting a race horse like that in there!!!
yea that last evidence question destroyed me. I had to race through the last 3 interrogatories. I don't think I did any of them right. All in all...a pretty woeful day.
I just looked in my evidence outline and realized I pretty much stated the wrong rule for every single CA evidence law -- can I still pass if I made pretty headings?
Re: the Kepler's Law question on part 2 of the PT...the key was that the square of the orbital period of a planet is directly proportional to the cube of the semi-major axis of its orbit. If you treated the orbit as circular instead of elliptical, you would have missed it.
I thought about making a similar post, but mine would have been way less witty. Well played sir.
Hope you kids are all enjoying the sheer hell on earth known as "California Bar: Day 2". Is it another 200 endless fact patterns for 200 different MCs like last year? Most likely. Man, I don't envy you guys, particularly after reading about Day 1's essays.
That said, having suffered through last year's total WTF Con Law question by just writing out of my ass and praying for a Democratic grader, and figuring I'd completely blown Day 2 when I had to just guess the last 10 questions or so, come Thanksgiving and the release of the pass names, I was greatly relieved to see my name on the list ... followed by an equally proportionate shock at seeing the names of too many of my classmates whose names should NEVER have been on the list.
Bottom line? This too shall pass, and so will most of you. Just write clearly tomorrow and keep on using those "pretty headings". If you can trick the bar grader into thinking you know what the fuck you're talking about, that's 3/4 of the battle.
Good luck!
Still Unemployed July 2009 Bar Passer
re: 11:46 AM
Wow, impressive that you passed the July Bar in 2008 and 2009.
A couple things about the MBE.
Am I crazy or was that a total Gant question about the arsonist being arrested when he pulled up in his car? I said exclude everything but I had no idea.
And didn't it feel like there were just a zillion "illusory promise" contract questions today? Or maybe I just got them all wrong...
2/3 done guys! By the time tomorrow we will be free!
yes and yes. Plus, did the second half seem significantly more challenging than the first? Maybe I was just tired.
Uhhh Federal Housing Act??? Where did that come from ?So many people were done early during the 2nd half so maybe it was just sheer exhaustion. The MBEs were definitely rough ... A lot of evidence questions and contracts : all and all - this was another tough day
I swear the marijuana question combined with the oath-taking question is an attempt at psychological profiling.
I was shocked at how many crim pro questions there were unrelated to search. Particularly on double jeopardy and 5th amendment self-incrimination.
Warren
11:46 A.M. Pretty crappy of you to say that your fellow classmates should not have passed the bar, after surely working very hard for 3 years at law school. If your comment was designed to make us feel better, it only made me feel sorry for you that you are so vindictive.
The FHA question was funny.
The car search wasn't Gant, because they didn't say that the arrestee was in the car. The new Gant rule only applies if they have already put the suspect in the cop car.
At least, that was my read. As we all know, that means absolutely jack shit.
One more to go everybody!!
I finished a bit early on the second half but not because it was easier. I think because it was HARDER. There were a few in that section, including the Federal Housing Act question and that one with "spot zoning" (?!?!) as an option where I was basically randomly guessing. Plus a few others that I realized that I wasn't sure about and wouldn't become sure no matter how long I sat and thought about it. So I just turned that sucker in to get the heck out of there. So I also think that the second half was definitely more challenging.
Nah, I don't think Gant said they had to be IN the cop car. I'm pretty sure Gant said they couldn't justify a search of a vehicle incident to arrest on officer safety grounds after the guy no longer had access to the car. The question said the arrestee complied with the officer's demand that he get out of the car. So even if he wasn't in the shotgun, he can't justify going through his briefcase and suitcase which were decidedly outside of his wingspan when he left the car.
But I bet they give everybody credit for the question anyway.
shotgun = police car.
I have no idea where the hell that came from.
quoting anon from the last thread:
"...[W]e hold that the [search-incident-to-arrest rule] rationale authorizes police to search a vehicle incident to a recent occupant’s arrest only when the arrestee is unsecured and within reaching distance of the passenger compartment at the time of the search"
So basically, the Q didn't have enough facts. We all win.
Regardless, the trunk was never ok. The old rule did allow searching containers that could contain a weapon, if they were in the passenger compartment.
just a general question - does softest double space our answers for the graders?
if not - i might want to include lines between headings to give it that little extra "hey look at me"
although i didn't the first day ...
Boalties, I need your help.
I think I probably need a 75 on the PT tomorrow to pass, but I have a really tough time finishing. Here's the approach I've been following: 1)outline the task memo on my computer, 2)read the case file, 3) type quotes from cases under the appropriate headings of my task memo outline.
The problem is that when I get pressed for time, the whole thing gets jumbled, and it turns into a big mess.
Any Boalties have advice on an efficient approach or method of organizing?
You're on the right track. That's basically what I do. Perhaps you should consider skimming the cases a bit faster? If you find some solid quotes and it doesn't look like the court is about to say, "EXCEPT FOR when this happens" you've got enough from that case and just move on. I think you want like at least 30 minutes at the end to organize your gathered facts and law into a coherent writing. Including more quotes from a case won't look as impressive as having the memo or whatever seem organized and pulled together.
Here's my two cents regarding performance tests.
1. Read task memo.
2. Go STRAIGHT to the library. "Brief" the cases, very quickly, on your screen, with special focus on rule statements and ANY multi-factor tests. Write down the factors.
3. Read case file.
I don't know WHY it helps so much for me to read the library first, but it seriously makes a world of difference. I think because it's easier to cut through the bullshit and see what's obvious, when im not reading the cases trying to figure out how they apply to the facts ive just read.
Anyway, I recommend this approach, having practiced it a bunch.
This might just be my personal style for the PTs, but I prefer to read the cases in chronological order rather than reverse like they usually organize them. I usually feel that just makes forming a concise outline of the relevant law easier.
I completely disagree. Usually the newer cases will be more relevant and will have overruled the old cases.
And sometimes the really old cases are just there to be distinguished ... like yesterday.
For PTs, I skim the facts quickly to figure out what's going on, then turn to the library. Make headings/rule statements on my computer from the cases. Then I go back to the File and add the fact analysis that's required.
I don't make a separate outline but turn my outline into the written assignment. I find this really helps time-wise.
I just want to interject and caution the person who asked about improving PT. In all honesty, it's really too late to change your fundamental approach. Notice all the comments are what people have been doing. And that's fine for them. But suddenly switching around what you've been doing will not really help.
Now the best thing to do tonight is to turn on the TV. Have a pleasant dinner. Maybe take some time to think about some of the remaining essay topics. Sleep well. And kick ass.
Thanks for the advice fellow Boalties.
Lets rock this thing.
Second session was definitely harder than the first, but took less time. Since when are federal statutes on the MBE??? I hope that was an experimental one...
Yeah, speaking of experimental, I swear I got a question that seemed like it was a Wills & Trusts question. I guess it could have technically been property, but it seemed to focus on lapse and anti-lapse statutes. I don't remember that in property.
The FHA statute? That's standard property. I don't think Barbri mentioned it though. And we do have fed statutes on the bar -- securities laws . . .
On the MBE though? I can't really think of any others, thought to be fair I can't really think at all right now.
Just to be clear and to remind myself:
On Day One, we had CivPro/Torts, Evidence, and Professional Responsibility, right?
I don't think it's crazy to think they could still zing us with another CivPro question, and PR is always good for a laugh as a cross-over. So really, we can only cross Torts and Evidence off our list, right?
1) You're right about the subjects covered.
2) I'm praying that they're done with CivPro. Or at least that they won't make us do California distinctions. Honestly, after California evidence, if they pull out California CivPro distinctions, I would really start to wonder what the class of '09 did to make the California bar examiners so angry!
And they pretty much always hit ConLaw, so you can almost count on one of those tomorrow.
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
I don't think Day 1 was civpro/torts. i think just torts. they always write their prompts/interrogatories based on a supposed "motion to dismiss." Dont rule out civpro for tomorrow.
I'd have to agree, that wasn't really a civ pro question. In the last five minutes I've gotten an inexplicable and totally unsupported hunch they're going to drop a CA class action question on us. Ascertainable class and well defined community of interest! (If that is on there and someone reads this I better pass on karma alone.)
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
And he's getting it!
You kids are so easy ...
yikes, I was just coming here to congratulate everyone on finishing the exam today. too bad that person had to spit such venom.
But anyway, to my fellow Boalties - CONGRATULATIONS! I've been thinking about you for the last three days! :-)
Congrats everyone, best summer ever.
Yes! Congratulations to all! And thanks to TJ for getting this thread (and its parent threads) up and running so we would all have a place to confer, whine, seek support, give support, etc.
Congrats to all! I totally screwed the second PT, was barely starting my qualified priv section when time was called. Didnt write a statement of facts. It was a mess. sigh.
Where did it ask for a statement of facts?
7/30/2009 7:37 PM: Don't worry, going by overwhelming evidence (i.e. my personal experience), it was easy to misallocate time on PT2... I ran out of time too. But maybe that's cause, as Honisberg would say, I'm too FABULOUS (read: perfectionist)
pt did not ask for statement of facts, that was not necessary.
was it just me or was the morning essay section absolutely brutal?
No-where. That's where. But it wouldn't be unhelpful to include a brief one I suppose.
It asked for a memo. Some memos have statements of facts. Your choice. I think it will be a little difficult for them to grade b/c there were no directions as to format. If you applied law to fact, you're golden.
I'm sure a Statement of Facts wasn't very important, if at all. And to the person who didn't finish, lots of people around me were complaining about not finishing either.
I didn't get the Con law essay. I basically just blurted out a bunch of stuff about economic regulation and the commerce clause
You did well, then. The commerce clause was a major part of that question.
Anybody else think that the barbri questions / focus points did very little to prepare us for those exam questions?
Does anyone have an outline of what they understood to be the differences between Cal and ABA on ethics? I have my own list that I now share with students but would like to compare mine with whatever the conventional wisdom is. If you're willing, you can mail to steele.john@gmail.com.
thanks.
Hey, "blog administrators" responsible for removing my posts: ever hear about the first amendment? Or is that yet another area in which you precious wee "Boalties" are deficient?
Pity, really. Can't wait to destroy you and your naivete if and when you ever make it into practice out in the real world.
1st amendment requires state action.
Good luck with that whole destroying thing.
Are you even a lawyer, rude-anonymous-guy? I mean, granted, a bunch of us just took the bar exam, but I think even most non-lawyers you can't call a First Amendment foul on a private act.
Is it just me, or did it seem like just about every *%$#ing question dealt with either Civ Pro and/or PR?
Thank God it's over, and best wishes to all for favorable results!
The guy is just a troll. Please don't feed the trolls. If he is a law student/lawyer then he is an idiot. If not...just kinda sad.
I'm still stressing about the first essay question... civ pro or torts? i can't believe they left that so ambiguous! The First PT was brutal; 2nd one wasn't as bad... MBEs were so hard...a lot of stuff in there was so random. I still am not 100% certain how the Bar is graded and scaled... Any info on that?
I think the first question was civ pro and torts. It was a motion to dismiss for failure to state a claim, which is different than the standard questions that just ask what claims / chances for success. I think it just wanted us to write a short bit about how a motion to dismiss survives as long as the allegations, if true, would support a claim of action. It just changes the standard of review, but the main analysis in the question was about torts / strict liability for inherently dangerous activity / foreseeable damages.
I really don't think the Civ Pro was the central part of the question, and if you missed it, I wouldn't worry too much.
And really, we all can sit back and think about questions that we missed. No one was perfect. It's graded on a curve; you can miss lots of stuff.
Just curious how people broke out the second PT? Did you do 1) litigation privilege a) judicial proceeding; b) related/nexus; c) in pursuit of claim; d) atty-client relationship. 2) common interest privilege.
I'm really wondering about the statement of facts situation on that performance test. Seems like there is a pretty even split between people that did one and people that didn't. I actually wrote a pretty long one, but it sounds like I'm the only one that did that. I basically just went into LRW mode and remembered some intimidating 3L ripping into my incomplete statement of facts three years ago.
My guess is that having one can't hurt, unless it really screwed up your time allocation. In any case though, 8:00 is right, it won't matter as long as you used the facts we had.
On the Con Law quesiton, did anyone show standing for all three entities...and can the private entity challenge the law? I wasn't sure. My analysis was: 1) no comandeering and must pay for additional costs; 2) law not valid unless findings...Lopez because no fed police power; 3) no comandeering, but may condition grants. How bad did I do?
5:23, yep. That first case in there was amazing.
The statement of facts will probably not hurt you. However, following directions is a factor on the PT.
Unless they have some sort of crazy Dormant Instructions Clause policy, including a s.o.f. when they just said to write a memo is fine.
5:34 is right. If the instructions had said: "do not write a statement of fact" (which they sometimes do), then you would have a problem.
It was a memo. Memos have statements of fact. Obviously we were being tested on our knowledge of how to construct a memo, because otherwise they would have given us directions on how to do it.
I doubt it's a big deal if you forgot one, but I'd be very surprised if having one doesn't help out.
**gulp** I only had two actual privileges, absolute and qualified...
Did I just completely miss everything else? I though sect 47 of that statute only really listed 3 possible privileges. All the other things, like attny-client, etc. were just included in my analysis of the two privileges...
8:29, you're fine. Those are the two privileges 5:23 is referring to. As 5:23 structured it, the litigation privilege had multiple subsections.
Did people do full memo sections? I did:
(I) Issue
(II) Short Answer
(III) Statement of Facts
(IV) Analysis
(A) Litigation / Judicial Proceedings
(B) Common Interest
(1) Interest
(2) Malice
(V) Conclusion
I'm sure it was better to split up the Litigation proceeding into subsections. My memo was a mess.
But it's just about being minimally competent, right? I really hope the standard isn't too high.
Are you kidding, 9:03? Have you ever met any practicing attorneys in California? The standard isn't high at all.
Of course there are some idiot lawyers out there, but there are also some sharp Boalties who have failed in years past.
Barbri would be must more helpful if they gave a number score to the essays. I still feel like I have no idea what a 62.5 - the average we supposedly need - looks like.
My second PT:
1) Absolute privilege
2) Qualified privilege
3) Privilege in the discharge of an official duty
I didn't do a stmt of facts because as Barbri kept saying Its a Closed Universe .... Do only what they tell you to do and memo just means ... "write" so I just did an intro and jumped into the privilege analysis... Geez I hope that's ok! Eeek!
Did anyone totally bomb the first PT... I spent so much rind trying to figure out material undisputed facts (which was ridiculous) that I totally lost it in the persuasive brief and just rambled thru the 3 topics and kept repeating myself over and over about the merger clause...
i'm fairly certain the graders expected a SOF. they asked for a memo, which always has one. however, i doubt it's gonna kill us if we didn't include one. but it's just like the whole 7 undisputed facts vs having 22 or whatever undisputed facts in the 1st PT...always include more. not including things that maybe don't fit: goooood idea? prob not. the examiners can always ignore what you wrote if it's wrong but they won't assume you excluded it b/c you were too smart to include it and knew a real court wouldn't let it in.
having said that, i have no idea if i passed and really don't know what i'm talking about! just my thoughts!
i know we have no control over the outcome at this point, and i feel happy and proud to have survived eighteen grueling hours of testing, but i keep having waves of panic when i think about getting the results. i just can't imagine going through this again. how are people putting november out of their heads?
beer.
I thought "official duty" would refer to a judge or an officer or something, not an attorney.
I only talked about absolute and qualified privilege.
Question: Did anyone else find the con law essay asked you to explain what arguments the agency, the bus company and the state would argue against the legislation? Everyone blogging just seems to have answered it as a standing question and asked themselves whether or not the agencies could bring the claims. But I moved from delegation powers and standing quickly into asking whether or not the legislation was going to be upheld based on a few challenges from the plaintiffs. Was I wrong?
--TX Lawyer
Day #1 - I highly doubt that was a civ pro question at all.
It was all about torts.
Strict Liability and Malicious prosecution (something babrbi never touched on, but in ready the essay book and "model" answers i saw repeat with some frequency so i got that).
The other two essays were ok that day
Performance Test #1 - the undisputed material facts took me about an hour to figure out so who knows i did manage to right a thorough brief
Day #2 - MBE seemed not as far in right field as the feb '09 (I took bar in another state and passed). I found finishing on time.
Day #3 - that first con law question threw me. I thouht the first one was about 3rd person standing. I also wrote as an intro about congress delegating authority to the various state agencies and the need to give some "inteligible standards".
the last part of that question I thought was commandeering and the second part was commerce and equal protection (only one type of ocmpany had to have the seat belts but others didnt) I did both analsys
Question #2 the nusiance and taking. I had to make up stuff about the injuction. I wrote about takings for public good etc.
the 2nd and 3rd parts were not bad at all. Res Judicata analsyis and then a PR issue as to what / when you can reveal what the client said. there was a distinction between CA and ABA when you think client is going to committ a crime.
last essay was crim pro and exclusions. I didnt think it was overly difficult.
performance test #2 - it asked us to write a memo. The instructions also said "draw on your general knowledge of law etc" I dont see how you could prepare a memo to the senior attorney without a brief statement of facts. I did that
then wrote questions presented based on each rule. Then a short application of the rule from each type:
absolute and qualified priv.
what a judicial proceeding is (the one case said its liberally applied)
and what the definitio of malice (remember the fact pattern said at the time he thought what he said was true).
In the last PT, the attorney who asked you to write the memo was the same one who interviewed the client and explained the facts to you, so I doubt a statement of facts was necessary. Most likely not a deal breaker either way.
I was thinking exactly what 11:55 was. The assigning attorney basically gave *us* a statement of the facts in her task memo. Why on earth would we give one back to her?
That second rog on the Con law could question could not have been two theories. It asked under each rog what constitutional "challenge" may the Bus co. bring. I would love to know what the appropriate challenge was for the second one. I didn't know.
The takings element of the second essay was a total red herring. Takings is about the government taking property from a private individual. Here, we had a private person taking property from a private person.
Actually, in practice attorneys usually want a statement of facts in every research memo etc...even if it is truncated.
This is because the supervising attorney want a reminder of what the hell is going on in the case. Now, this doesn't have anything to do with the bar exam, but I think adding a statement of facts in a memo to highers up is generally appreciated, if not expected.
Obviously, this is just from my experience as a law clerk; maybe it is different for practicing attorneys.
Didn't the second essay explictly say to limit the discussion to whether or not the injunction should be granted, and not go into the substantive law underlying the potential claim? I just did inadequacy of legal remedies / property rights / feasibility of enforcement / balancing hardships / laches and unclean hands.
Were we supposed to do a discussion of takings? Shit.
Q4 Part 1 I discussed standing, state action, commerce clause and the afectation doctrine, Lopez higher requirement for non-economic activity, and threw in some equal protection (higher requirements only for commercial license instructors); Part 2 commerce - but this time regulation was ok bc busses are an instrumentality of interstate commerce, and threw in some equal protection just in case; Part 3 commandering and spending power.
Q 5- For Part 1 Ionly discussed 5 elements of injunction, part 2 compared applied both RJ and CE; Part 3 discussed ACP and Duty of COnfidentiality (ABA vs. CA Crime requirement).
q-6 Part 1 I duscussed 4th amendment, exclusionary rule and exceptions (Traffic Stop, Auto, no SILA, no PV). Part 2 threw me b/c Q asked what constitutional challenges "Dave the Driver" could make regarding Paul the passenger's admission. I ifrst discussed Paul's arrest was proper b/c police had PC believe dope could be passengers per CA supreme Court, then I went through 5th amendment requirements, explained standard for waiver and that there was none, concluded admission was proper, added that unless 4th amendment was source of violation (wasnt here) then Dave had no right to challenge admission and was entitled to sep trial b/c it would violate right to fair trial and 14th DPC; Part 3 threw me also. I automatically assumed Dave's attorney was court appointed and discussed 6th req for adequate representation. Only after the exam did it hit me that atty could be priv counsel and he could replace so long as no undue delay or prejudice. Oh well.
PT2- I did no statement of facts. I failed the bar last july by a hair. In that bar we had a very similar objective letter as well. I did a statement of facts that chewed up time during my analysis. Got a 60. Looked at the model from that bar exam. Guess what. Both models had either no SOF or a very short one (no more than 4 sentnces). So this time, I wrote 2 sentences on the facts and dove right into the analysis. Did not want to make the same mistake twice.
Any thoughts about my analysis of day 3 Q's and PT.
I was a first time taker (from Texas), and I was "in a puddle" for the first half of day 1.
I don't know what it takes to pass an essay, and I am very concerned that I failed everything. I think I averaged about a 60 on all my essays.
Q1 - For interrog. 1, I discussed the Civ. Pro issue, and it ate into my time. Failed to discuss defenses to strict liab. For malicious prosecution, I threw in punitive damages and J&S liab. b/c they "acted in concert." - 60
Q2 - I flailed about here, and wrote about as many things as I could. I knew the prosecutor had a few special duties, including disclosure of evidence. - 60
Q3 - The racehorse killed me. I only had time to talk about marital confidentiality & lack of competence for the last 2 interrogatories. No nice BarBri format - 55
Q4 - I did a preliminary discussion, including the intelligent principle, and dove in. For the third interogatory, I too wrote about the tension between the general welfare clause & Am. X no commandeering - 60
Q5 - I did not write about takings at all. I discussed RJ & CE and properly listed their elements, but I'm certain that I came to the wrong conclusion. - 60
Q6 - I thought the interrogatories were about Am. IV (search and seizure obviously), Am. VI confrontation clause issue for D, and Am. VI ineffective assistance of counsel per Strickland v. Washington. - 65
PT A - I did only 10 material facts and wrote along the same lines as everyone else - 65
PT B - major blunder. Included an SOF, but I barely discussed absolute immunity and spend most of my time on qualified privilege/malice/interest. - 55 maybe. It could be worse.
I am banking that the MBE went well to save me from failure on this exam. I have lots of respect for those who passed the CA bar
-- Longhorn Law Student
I like how Nuts and Boalts has expanded to the outside world.
Why did people write about claim and issue preclusion? It was a claim preclusion question because the issue was whether he could bring the same suit for an injunction.
And the prompt said not to discuss substantive property law, so I don't think we were expected to discuss takings. I just talked about injunctions.
Takings would fall under Constitutional Law as well if I am not mistake. I just wrote a few sentences saying takings apply when the goverment is acting and here it is a case about private vs private so that wouldnt apply at all.
For Q1, I'm not sure defenses to strict liability would be necessary to discuss given the procedural posture...but I could be wrong on that.
We're about to hit the comment max on this thread. If y'all want to continue this discussion, you'll have to move the convo to the more recent thread "the bar exam is dead".
Response to 4:40
I initially also limited my discussion to claim preclusion, but decided to add issue preclusion because 1) a closer read of the interrogatory revealed that the question asked about "preclusion" ( i read that to mean either) and 2) the two go hand in hand per bar bri format - when you discuss one discuss the other.
Also, the only SL defense i discussed was an actual defense - that the economic damages/injury suffered by P was not the type that was normally the type associated with an UHA. Although, it probably would not have hurt to mention that P did not knowingly and voluntarily assume the risk... oh well.
My evidence was a blunder- i knew it all, but simply ran out of time. The second half of that essay prob looks like it was written by a 5th grader.
2:24-
Claim preclusion and issue preclusion are different. Just because they're next to each other in the Barbri outline doesn't mean they are applied together. The issue was whether the guy could bring the same claim, also seeking an injunction, as was already brought. That's claim preclusion.
Reading this blog makes me worried that I missed too many issues and misstated too much law to pass. Does anyone else feel that way?
I'm genuinely puzzled by the continued discussion, actually. What's there to be gained? I'm reminded of this poster. This is the last thing I'd want on my mind until November. But that's just me.
5:23,
Yes, yes, yes. This blog gave me a panic attack a few nights ago. Not sure why I keep coming back.
5:23 I'm so with you.
Injunctive relief isn't your typical res judicata material.
There hasn't even been a complete case after all. A good lawyer would address both, even when one did not appl. That said, claim preclusion was the major concern Q5.
--TX Lawyer
情趣按摩棒,自慰套,角色扮演,按摩棒,跳蛋,跳蛋,
情趣,情趣,角色扮演服,吊帶襪,丁字褲,情趣用品,情趣用品,跳蛋,男女,
潤滑液,SM,情趣內衣,內衣,性感內衣,自慰器,充氣娃娃,AV,
按摩棒,電動按摩棒,飛機杯,視訊,自慰套,自慰套,
Did anyone else get that the claim preclusion in question 5 was kind of a trick question because you are supposed to use the law of the forum state and we didn't know the forum state?
This comment has been removed by the author.
Post a Comment
<< Home