Exam Updates from 2/13 Bar Exams
From the test sites…
As we get more details, we’ll update this post, but here’s what we know now.
In Florida, the exam tested:
Civil and criminal procedure
Wills, Estates, and Administration
In California, the first day of the exam tested:
Real Property (conversion)
In Georgia, the first day of the exam tested:
Corporations (what type to set up, etc – surprisingly detailed – question was at least two pages)
Contracts UCC 2 installment contract breach / anticipatory repudiation
Fed Civ Pro (comparing rules 12 and 56 – responsive pleadings and summary judgment).
In New York
Lots of multi-part crossover essays on Tuesday. Here’s a recap of each question:
Essay #1 (Contracts/Real Property/Professional Responsibility)
2) Assuming there was, did the contract satisfy the statute of frauds?
3) Was Lawyer ethical when he spoke to Owner about Al’s possible settlement claim?
4) Will Friend receive 6% commission from Owner?
Essay #2 (Crim/Crim Pro/Professional Responsibility/Evidence)
Students were asked to say whether the court was right to allow a defendant witness to testify to a statement made to him when a victim said she was shot by another individual. There was also an issue of alibi and after the a witness testified that the defendant was in another state, the defendant told his attorney that the witness said he lied about his testimony since he knew that the defendant was not out of state when the shooting took place. You were then asked to state whether any ethical issue arose.
1) Is Ben’s statement on Vicki’s statement admissible?
2) Was the jury instruction on David’s alibi defense proper?
3) Was Lawyer’s actions ethical regarding what David told Lawyer about Ben’s statement?
4) Should the court grant David’s motion to dismiss based on double jeopardy on the murder to the 2nd degree charge?
Essay #3 (Trusts/Wills)
The wills essay concerned a totten trust and a bequest of $200,000 to be paid to the children of the testator and whether it offended the rule against perpetuity and the interest to be taken by each party.
1) Does the testamentary trust violate the Rule Against Perpetuities?
2) Assuming the trust violates RAP, how should the trust assets be distributed?
3) Which estate (between Harry’s Estate and Sally’s Estate) should get the totten trust bank account funds?
4) What is Wilma’s elective share and what is the value of it?
Essay #4 (Torts)
1. Was the court’s ruling correct on Liz’s motion to strike punitive damages?
2. Was the judge’s instruction on res ipsa loquitor proper?
3. Will Apex and Doctor incur joint and several liability?
4. What are Apex and Doctor’s rights regarding contribution?
Essay #5 (Corporations/Domestic Relations)
The corporations essay was whether a directors meeting had a quorum when the meeting was attended by only 12 of 15 directors. 6 of the twelve voted on a resolution to purchase clothes from another business, when the corporation’s officer made the recommendation to the directors who did not take any measure to verify the wisdom of the purchases. You were to say whether the directors could be held personally liable.
The same officer entered into a separation agreement with her husband and you were to say whether the agreement could be modified after a divorce when the officer lost her job and their son was now in private school, after recommendations by the school counselor.
1. Was the directors’ adoption of the resolution of purchasing XUMA’s inventory properly adopted?
2. Assuming the directors’ adoption was improper, will the directors incur liability for waste and neglect based on the purchase?
3. Was the court’s ruling proper granting the motion to modify child support in the separation agreement?
4. Was the court’s ruling proper granting the husband’s motion that he is not obligated to pay for private secondary education as part of his child support obligations?
Tested Procedure and Evidence along with an MPT. Reports of problems in Austin with Softest. “the first day with the computers was a bit of a disaster for Softest and a lot of examinees. People were waving red flags maniacally trying to get help to close out their exam. The president of the board of law examiners is proctoring our exam and I think she was more than a little frustrated.”
Day 2: MBE
Lots of questions that were described as weird topics, but generally the same test as usual. There were some curious Crim Law and Procedure questions, an FHA question and a ““knowledgeable intermediary” doctrine in products liability that all brought comments from bar takers.
One student wrote: “there were very few lengthy questions. Most were a paragraph or two. Almost zero questions with multiple sub questions stemming from the same fact pattern. A few people finished with an HOUR to spare. Lots finished with at least 30 minutes.”
How did the MBE go for you? And good luck to those in Texas, California and New Jersey on Thursday!