This is Your Brain; This is Your Brain on the Bar
Update, July 26, 2010: Good luck, everybody.
Update, July 16 & 20, 2010: Those familiar with BarBri- and MBE-type multiple choice questions will enjoy this. It keeps making me laugh.
Update, July 15, 2010: Bumping up to the front of the line . . .
Update, July 11, 2010: Bump. Here is the previous 2010 bar exam thread; let's use this one comments, gripes, questions, and support. Also, apologies to folks who make comments and they don't immediately appear. I don't know exactly what has been going on, but it is well-documented that Google blogger platform sucks in fundamental ways. All I can do is apologize, and hope the glitch fixes itself, or heals, or whatever.
_______________________
Ugh. I doubt I am the only person who feels irritated, stressed out, and grouchy these days. Is it really already July? This word cloud, which I made from the sample answers to the 2008 and 2009 July California Bar Exams, rather nicely describes the space between my ears:
Click the image to enlarge.
Who would have guessed that Paul, Dave, and Diane, were as important as Congress?
Update, July 16 & 20, 2010: Those familiar with BarBri- and MBE-type multiple choice questions will enjoy this. It keeps making me laugh.
Update, July 15, 2010: Bumping up to the front of the line . . .
Update, July 11, 2010: Bump. Here is the previous 2010 bar exam thread; let's use this one comments, gripes, questions, and support. Also, apologies to folks who make comments and they don't immediately appear. I don't know exactly what has been going on, but it is well-documented that Google blogger platform sucks in fundamental ways. All I can do is apologize, and hope the glitch fixes itself, or heals, or whatever.
_______________________
Ugh. I doubt I am the only person who feels irritated, stressed out, and grouchy these days. Is it really already July? This word cloud, which I made from the sample answers to the 2008 and 2009 July California Bar Exams, rather nicely describes the space between my ears:
Click the image to enlarge.Who would have guessed that Paul, Dave, and Diane, were as important as Congress?
Labels: Bar Exams
posted by Patrick Bageant at 12:12 AM
91 Comments:
You're not the only one, Patrick. On the one hand I'd give anything for an extra week between now and the bar. On the other hand, well, you know.
when a claim can't be brought because it was a compulsory counterclaim in a previous case and wasn't raised, can we call that "res judicata"? if not, is there anything to call it besides an unraised compulsory counterclaim?
5:12, if this issue comes up on the bar exam, I will let you take one free punch at me (on the arm). Focus on the big fish.
thanks, armen. good call.
--5:12
Exactly how are people planning to spend the next nineteen days? I'm basically planning to read through my lecture notes a million times and to do as many practice essays as I can, but I'm wondering if there's anything else I should be doing.
armen, any more advice??
mainly, how do i not crap my pants from now until july 27? what do i do for the next 20 days? do you have crack?
Sure, I have tips. And they're generally the same from year after year.
1. On Saturday and Sunday, place all books bearing "Bar/Bri" or "PMBR" on them at least 30 feet away from you. Then enjoy the World Cup matches without thinking about a legal issue. (If soccer is not your thing, find something else to rest your brain a little bit. Working out is one of the better activities).
2. Practice. That means actually timed essays (3 at a time to simulate actual testing conditions) and actually timed Multiple Choice Questions (100 at a time). The rule of thumb I used (and it's only a rule of thumb and nothing else), but I tried to fully write ~ 5 essays per topic, and outline a few more.
3. Each individual has a different way of absorbing the material. Anecdotal evidence suggests one of the more successful ways is to go from detailed to broad. That is, by this point you've probably reviewed your notes, looked at the minireview outline, made flashcards, etc. But in July, you should be focusing on the big. Something like condensing a subject matter to a very brief outline...something that you can memorize. You can make one or find some already made. I know there are those floating around. If you can't find them, ask the original poster, I know he has them.
4. Get to know the lay of the land. I think there are previous bar exam threads offering detailed intel on the various exam locations. You should also fly in the day before. Scope things out (food options for lunch?), time to get to/from exam site to home/hotel, and maybe just to walk around and not think about the California distinctions to the evidence code.
5. This is roughly in order of importance to success on the bar exam. Number 1 is the most critical. In California, you are taking a test of knowledge AND endurance. You need to be at your mental sharpest for three straight days.
any chance they'll make it open-book this year?
the last few weeks is when you MEMORIZE. make your own mnemonic devices (e.g. LIES, DAD - for the duties of a trustee - loyalty, to invest, to earmark, to segregate, of due care, to account, and well, dammit, i forget. look it up).
you will find yourself clinging to your mnemonics like life rafts, especially for your weak topics. once you have a mnemonic on which to hang your hat, the essay writes itself.
and yes, lots of practice exams. and in your weak area, or areas you didnt take in law school, reread your outlines.
Wait, it's not open book?
Would my mnemonic of duties from lawyers to clients help or hurt at this point? Because I do have one, but I don't want to make things worse.
This may be foolish, but although I do plan on a lot of practice essays, I'm also thinking about spending a pretty serious amount of time with the in-class workbook. Thus far how I've done on a given practice essay has turned mostly on how well I knew the pertinent rules; I really want to make sure I'm on top of the biggies. Hope I'm not shooting myself in the foot with this plan.
any mnemonics would be helpful at this stage.
Here’s my cheesy mnemonic. I hope it helps.
Suppose a tropical disease called “CLISP” was running wild. We’d expect the CDC (Center for Disease Control) to fight the epidemic. Because CLISP is a tropical disease that flourishes in warmer temperatures, the CDC laboratories fighting CLISP make heavy use of AC (air conditioning) to keep the labs cools.
AC at CDC to fight CLISP. Again,
AC at CDC to fight CLISP
AC = “Abide & Consult.” Abide by the competent client’s decisions regarding objectives; and Consult with the client about tactics.
CDC = Competence, Diligence, and Communication. These are basic duties you owe the client.
CLISP =
Confidentiality
Loyalty (i.e., conflicts)
Independent judgment
Safeguarding Property of the Client
Then move down the list making comments about any duties that are teed up in the fact pattern.
That's fantastic.
most of my mnemonics are patently offensive and reflect a shameful or morbid interest in sex.
at least it's not a shameful interest in morbid sex.
8:38 we need those mnemonics. NEED them. Please post them.
This old thread has a few that you may find useful. The last one in the comments is my favorite.
I post that more for the humorous value than anything else. I do want to say that from my personal perspective, I found the mnemonics ineffective. I spent a lot of mental juice trying to remember the mnemonic and what it stood for. I figured I could spend the same time just learning the damn elements. But again, this is not the time to rock the boat. If it works, keep at it.
Some of those 2007 mnemonics I might really use. Like:
Conviser Is a MotherFucking Douchebag (for specific performance): 1) Contract terms are definite/certain; 2) Inadequacy of legal remedy; 3) Mutuality; 4) Feasibility of enforcement; 5) Defenses
What is the difference between malice and general intent?
am i screwed, or am i not screwed? two and a half weeks till the bar. i guess the good move is to assume i'm not screwed. but it sure doesn't feel that way.
Sorry if this is a stupid question, but why do I need to know the CA civ pro distinctions? All of the former cal civ pro essays test State X and State Y, etc. None of them mention anything happening in a California court. Of course I'm going to stress out and learn the distinctions anyway but why am I doing so if they have NEVER BEEN ON THE EXAM???
What am I missing?
Sorry if this is a stupid question, but why do I need to know the CA civ pro distinctions? All of the former cal civ pro essays test State X and State Y, etc. None of them mention anything happening in a California court. Of course I'm going to stress out and learn the distinctions anyway but why am I doing so if they have NEVER BEEN ON THE EXAM???
What am I missing?
Well, they had never done CA evidence before when we took the bar last year. Guess what? There it was.
Because I think of the MBE as my "strong" (less weak) area, it really kills me and terrifies me when I do badly on a problem set.
For those currently studying: Did anyone take a course with a company other than Kaplan or Barbri? If so did you like it?
I echo Armen's advice to PRACTICE PRACTICE PRACTICE. You don't have to know everything - you're not going to AmJur the bar. Aim for mediocrity and you'll pass with flying colors.
For the essays you just have to know how you're going to attack each subject. Practicing will show you which subjects you're clueless in - and even for the subjects you know something about practice will show you the quickest way to spew your outline into an essay. I found that after doing several essays in each subject you get a sense that the examiners can only ask you about a subject in a few different ways.
thanks, 6:26. for whatever reason today's been a really stressful and frustrating day for me: i feel like my command of the material is regressing, and i feel like now is not a good time for that. focusing on practice and aiming for mediocrity are probably both good ideas.
Here's my mnemonic for Defenses to Formation. The contract I wrote sucks because I DUMASS LLM
Illegality
Duress
Unconscionability
Mistake
Ambiguity in words of agreement
Statute of Frauds
Lack of capacity
Lack of consideration
Misrepresentations
And nothing against LLMs, it's just what worked. :)
Wow, I guess it actually reads "I DUMAS LLM," making me an actual dumbass. Sorry folks.
Thanks, Monica. Works for me.
am i going to die? cause it feels like i'm gonna die.
we all feel that way sometimes, 10:32. i know i do. if it's helpful, i keep coming back to what someone said here earlier this summer: that it's hard to imagine that every licensed attorney in California mastered all this stuff. i don't know what that says about where i'm at right now, but i'm just going to try to absorb as much as i can in these two remaining weeks and to try not to worry overmuch about mastering everything.
Can you use a coerced confession to impeach a criminal defendant in the way that you can use the fruits of an illegal search or seizure to impeach?
3:02 - Yes, but you have to lay foundation (doesn't have to be before you offer statements from the confession).
Do any of you former bar takers have an opinion on this? If you approach on an issue on the bar, and you know that a rule exists for the particular situation, but can't remember which way the rule goes, do you 1) pick one way and argue it, knowing it may be wrong, or 2) ignore it, or 3) some weird combo of this (like saying "I'm not certain of this, but ", etc. Thoughts?
Theresa said--
Hey Toney! My two cents: I think you should go ahead and apply the rule even if you are unsure of the outcome. That's what I did when I was not sure. You have 50% chance of being right. Also, there are a lot of wrong analysis/law on the published answers to the CA bar.
I am so fucked There is no way I have that kind of distinction at my fingertips.
You don't need it. Like I said. Big picture. At most this would be one of multiple issues in an essay question. You can wing it. The bulk of the points are in applying the rule to the facts presented, not getting the actual rule right. Make something up or borrow something from a related concept ("Assuming admission of a coerced statement for a purpose other than the truth of the matter asserted is based on the same factors as the "fruit of the poisonous tree" doctrine, then the confession can be admitted. Here, D testified XYZ. Yada Yada Yada").
Learn the details by writing sample answers. The whole writing anxiety followed by review should help you remember. Research shows we remember better when we're slightly anxious (but not too nervous). So, you know, ~2 weeks, plenty of time to go over each subject, throw in 2 or 3 performance tests. You're set.
Thanks, Armen. I'm not 100 percent sure I believe you, but I am 100 percent sure sure I WANT to believe you. I'll roll with that.
Sure, no problem. Alternatively you can order The Thomas Crown Affair from Netflix (now on BluRay!), and issue spot your way to learning Crim Pro. Interrogations, illegal searches, seizures, it's loaded with issue spotters. Plus it has an amazing soundtrack. See here, here, and here.
When I study Partnerships, I think of Madmen.
Talking with Toney just now, I realized a very valuable point that cannot be repeated enough times:
DO NOT EVEN ATTEMPT TO PREDICT ESSAY QUESTIONS, NOT EVEN AFTER THE FIRST DAY.
Just don't do it. It's terrible. You will get burned. During 2007 July, they had 3 MBE topics the first day....and three more the last day. They also had a First Amendment Con Law question...just like the two prior years (or exams, I forget).
would they actually have two essays on the same topic, like a con law essay on day one and then another on day three?
3:02 - Toney is actually somewhat incorrect, depending on his and your definition of "coerced." Statements made by the defendant that are obtained in violation of Miranda (but are still voluntary) ARE admissible to impeach the defendant at trial. However, coerced (involuntary) confessions ARE NOT admissible at trial for any purpose.
4:41 - Good point. I assume you mean coerced as in "tortured", etc?
I do think there is some worth to predicting questions, though perhaps not much. If you have two subjects, one of which has been asked about each of the last three exams, and another which hasn't been asked in the last three exams, it is more likely that the unasked one will be asked than the asked one. Obviously I can't prove this other than by looking over the past subject data they give us, but it's only human nature to vary subject matter somewhat.
Having said that, the value of this probably lies in deciding which subjects to hit one last time or read over extra carefully in the final days before the exam. Other than that, there probably isn't much utility in it. I'll make my predictions the night before.
Toney, there's no basis for believing one is likelier than the other, none. Not even human nature. Without turning this into a scene from The Princess Bride, the Bar is well aware of human nature and they rely on that misperception when selecting questions.
So the idea that because something has been asked 3 times in a row, therefore marginally you shouldn't devote as much time to it is complete bunk.
And to clarify, the time it would take for you to analyze the questions asked in prior years, the frequency, etc. would be better spent on writing a couple of essays on the subjects you don't feel as strongly about. The benefit of trying to predict the essays is so trivial, it's not worth a discussion. On the other hand, the harm that could result from inadequate preparation in any subject area cannot be understated. You do the math.
What, if anything, is the difference between a trust "res" and a trust "corpus"?
Tony has a good point. I'm not going to even bother studying PR.
armen, do you think doing practice essays is a valuable use of our time?
Yes. Especially if you replicate bar exam conditions, i.e., 3 essays for 3 hours.
1. You are practicing your timing. How long to read / think about a question. How long to organize. How long to write. How to manage between "easy" (relatively speaking) questions that you finish with a few minutes to spare and another one that you're struggling with.
2. You are practicing issue spotting.
3. You are learning the substantive rules when thinking about a response, writing the response, and then reviewing it against a sample answer.* That's three different ways that you are being exposed to a particular issue/subject area. The more exposure (and in particular the greater variety in exposure) the more we remember things. Also, doing essays has a way of contextualizing rules. It's one thing to know the requirements of class cert, it's another to remember a particular question where you wrote out the requirements.
The asterisk is to warn that the Bar/Bri sample answers, as you've already discovered, are riddled with errors. The consensus is that they are the model answers selected by the Bar Examiners for each essay, rather than model answers that Bar/Bri has written. God forbid Bar/Bri spend anything more than the minimal effort.
OH yeah, forgot to mention that. PR is the exception.
Sorry Tony, a coerced confession is not admissible for impeachment. New Jersey v. Portash, 440 U. S. 450
You are confusing an unmirandized-confession with a coerced confession. A coerced confession is inadmissible because it is a direct violation of the due process clause (5th or 14th amendment as applicable) and because coerced confessions are presumed to be untrue.
A confession obtained in violation of the prophylactic rules under the 5th and 6th amendments may be admissible under the exclusionary rule balancing test, and categorically, it has been held that the need to use for impeachment purposes outweighs the purposes underlying the prophylactic rule if the confession is sufficiently trustworthy. Harris v. New York, 401 U. S. 222; Kansas v. Ventris.
For the distinction, a coerced confession is when they beat you around until you confess, while an unmirandized confession is when they fail to read the Miranda warnings or refuse to provide an attorney after requested or refuse to discontinue interrogation after an invocation of the right to remain silent.
12:28. Sorry, I should have been more clear. I was thinking "coerced" meant "Un-Miranda-ized", as you noted. Thanks for clearing up the confusion.
Armen, thanks for the asterisk comment. The BB answers have been angering me for weeks now.
when i pack my bag for the trip to take the bar, what all do i need to bring?
The items described here.
At the risk of jinxing my own analysis, I thought I'd add that in the last 18 exams, over nine years, only one exam (July 2007) had no PR essay question at all. (In some, PR was half of one essay question.)
John, the PT that year was very heavy on professional responsibility.
This comment has been removed by the author.
According to BarBri, PR is mandatory so we'll definitely be seeing it as either a full essay, cross-over, or performance exam subject.
Just to offer a different view I don't think practicing essays is really an effective use of my time. I did one every couple of days and felt like I did well on the actual essay portion of the bar exam. I found it much more beneficial to just review outlines and memorize.
Everybody has different learning styles so don't forget to do what works for you.
I recommend doing timed practice tests the way Armen suggests for three reasons.
First, you will be prepared for the time pressure of the exam. Any unfinished section of the exam is lost points or potential points. Many people don't finish essays or multiple choice.
Second, reading the sample answers gives you an idea of how the examiners expect you to answer the questions.
Third, it will highlight the areas you know well and what areas you need to brush up on more.
Anecdote: I took the California bar last summer and set the February 2009 exam aside to do about 5 days before the test as a timed practice. Imagine my surprise when California evidence showed up. But I honed my ability to answer a question when I wasn't confident of the rules, and I had five days to master California evidence. Which appeared last summer too.
God I'm sick of studying for the bar.
Might I suggest: failing the bar would be quite the blessing in disguise. You don't really appreciate the toll 70 hour weeks take on you until you've done them every week for four months.
i believe it, 12:16. man. not sure what to hope for anymore.
i have resigned myself to knowing only about 5 rules out of the 8 million for commercial paper...mistake?
imho, if your talking NY, then your probably fine. They just tested commerical paper last summer and given its infrequent appearance anyways, it is unlikely to come up again. But if you know a few basic rules your probably going to be fine. better to know more contracts and torts than a tiny subject like commerical paper
If my odds of passing are so good, how come I'm so nervous?
If I'm doing practice essays in half the time that I'll be allotted, but spotting almost all the issues in the samples given by BarBri, what am I doing wrong?
4:26 - You clearly aren't drinking enough whiskey. Pour yourself a couple dippers, sit back and drink deeply. You don't need ALL your brain cells.
4:26 - you aren't necessarily doing anything wrong. I am also a fast test taker and finished the essays way early. I passed. Just don't talk about the amount of time you spent on the essays with your friends, especially during the exam breaks. It freaks people out.
To what extent should we be hitting the more nonsensical, or stretched, issues? For instance, I just did a sample tort essay where a woman, who was walking along a sidewalk in front of her house with her sister in law, was struck and killed by a speeding driver that lost control of his vehicle.
The sample essay explains that the sister in law might try to raise an assault claim, but that it would fail because the driver's conduct probably lacked the requisite level of intent for this intentional tort. I didn't write about assault because it seemed irrelevant - the facts made it pretty clear the driver was negligent and not reckless, so assault isn't really in play. Same for wrongful death for the woman (she was killed) based on battery rather than negligence.
Should we be covering these close-but-not-quite torts (and crimes and such) on the exam? It doesn't make sense to me, because it extrapolates to writing things like "the husband might try to make a claim for private nuisance against the driver, but will fail because one out-of-control car errantly hurtling onto his property is not enough to rise to the level of nuisance; he may have a successful claim for trespass, though," etc. At some point that has to start to suggest a lack of judgment, right?
That's a really good question Matt, and it raises several related points.
1. You can't write about an unrelated topic and get points. The issues that get points awarded are predetermined. Taking that torts question as an example, you can't write, "the state might charge the driver with rape, but that's not likely because there was no rape." Obviously that shows you haven't read the fact pattern carefully.
2. But, just like in law school, even though a claim is not viable, it doesn't mean you should not analyze that to explain your conclusion. The assault discussion may be good enough for a fraction of a point, which can make a difference. At the same time, you're not going to be penalized for it. So why not be thorough.
3. The obvious point though is not to miss the big issues that they clearly want you to cover. You should add these tiny tangential points if you have a bit of extra time.
4. I just want to say good luck, we're all counting on you.
to matt's question - that is why you need pnuemonics. for example, you MUST list and briefly analyze the homicide quartet for every question where someone dies, even if it was obviously not murder. do not forget to do it just because it seems so obvious.
4:26 - are you including correct, clear, rule statements? i too am a fast writer but almost always used every minute.
Mnemonic, mnemonic, mnemonic. Repeat after me and remember: Mnemonic. There's no air; no pneu.
I think I figured out why the Bar makes me so nervous despite our 93.2% pass-rate. It's the first test I've ever taken where I can't possibly learn everything. And it's really unsettling not knowing everything going into a test, especially when there is so much riding on it.
Good news, though. Apparently we don't actually have to know everything to pass.
I agree - knowing you won't know it well is frustrating. I'm at this point where in order to to get anything new into my brain I have to push something else out. I'm scared that if I leave the house to study, I'll discover that I pushed out the wrong information and will not be able to find my way home.
Any advice for the next couple days?!
On Monday do not do any studying (at most, look over some performance tests). No flashcards, no outlines, no essays - NOTHING! Talk a walk, go to the gym, have a good dinner, and relax.
Also, a tip for during the bar. I made the mistake on day 2 of doing 10 MBE questions to "wake me up". Bad idea - I missed 7 out of 10 and had to calm myself down on the way to the test. Just don't do it.
I agree that you should take Monday off. Seriously. Sleep in, watch TV, exercise, whatever. Probably shouldn't drink, but you should know how alcohol/drugs affects your system.
I recommend the time you have until Monday should be spent reviewing and memorizing. Flash cards or attack outlines. This helped me because I had spent the last few weeks doing practice tests and had gotten a good sense of what I needed to know to answer essay questions. I felt good once I had an idea of how to GENERALLY approach every subject.
I found this much more helpful than worrying about the MBEs. There is little chance you can cram new information at this point. I think the key is organizing what you already know.
I agree with the last post. Spend this weekend filling in the gaps in your knowledge or your perceived weak points. My weakness was a couple CA-only subjects and the PT, so that's what I spent my time on. Monday I did laundry and spent some time with my family's cat, whom I owe big time for helping me relax that last day.
I don't care what you say. I'm studying tomorrow. I do my best studying the day before the test, and I feel like things are finally starting to come together.
i feel like things came together for me at some point a week or two ago but since then have somehow gone all to hell. there are a lot of rules in my head, but i'm terrified that i won't be able to deploy them in any remotely competent way. remind me what happens if i fail this thing?
2:37 -
I myself have been fluctuating between periods of relative confidence and rampant panic. I agree that all this doctrine is in my brain somewhere, but doing a couple of the con law practice essays today, I failed to spot some of the issues I probably should have.
Just keep in mind that this sort of feeling is pretty standard across test takers, with only a few exceptions (*ahem* Patrick) who have the sort of capacity to barf everything up as needed.
Remember: you can miss a lot and still pass this thing. That's what's helped dampen my sinusoid.
thanks, toney. and best of luck to you on tuesday.
--2:37
Best of luck, kids. You've got a whole crowd of fellow Boalties who are sending you good thoughts this week.
Post a Comment
<< Home