Only one more multistate bar exam (MBE) subject left to go: Torts. Theoretically, if I can do very well on these six subjects and ok on the rest, I will pass. At least I know these subjects will be ON the bar. The rest it's an educated guess.
PR tomorrow and hopefully I can start Torts as well. We'll see.
I'm getting a bit sick of trying to catch up. Ugh.
I'm stunned at how much of this I remember from law school. I think my first-year contracts professor must have done an excellent job. I honestly feel like I could take this section of the bar right now.
So that makes one section. ;)
Not a big fan of hearsay. It's confusing. That is all.
I don't think I like Simons quite as much for evidence, but evidence is just more boring. He's definitely not bad, but it just feels like rule after rule after rule.
I'm kind of excited to get back to a lecturer I know I like. Or at least I liked his criminal law lecture. I wasn't a huge fan of evidence in law school, so we'll see if Simons can do anything with it in BarBri land.
Going over Con Law stuff reminded me of something I had forgotten. Con Law has some coherent principles, but not many and is riddled with exceptions. A lot of times it just seems to be who is on the court matters more than what the Constitution says.
I like Con Law, but this is the more boring, structural half. This half is interesting when there is discussion and debate, but as a black letter law subject, it's not too hot. It's fairly straightforward and I've found that I remember almost all of it already.
Again, this post got up late. Apologies to all my loyal readers.
The topic was pretty straightforward, but the lecturer drove me crazy. It made me want to go back to Property!
This post got up a bit late, but I loved the Property lecturer. She was about as good as I can imagine a BarBri lecturer being. I might even remember something about Property law as a result!
I've gotta say, the proper lecturer is really, really good. She's slightly crazy, but anyone who includes both Ja Rule and Nat King Cole references during a property lecture can't be all bad in my book.
Property. If I recall from the BarBri intro lecture, this is the subject with the worst scores on the MBE. It's pretty easy to understand why as well. Property uses arcane terminology, unintuitive rules, and silly language like "to A and his heirs."
Unless you like learning foreign languages, it's hard to imagine liking property that much.
The corporations material isn't bad so far. I covered most of it in my class in law school and the professor doing the lecture is really good. He kinda reminds me of my corporations professor, actually.
I really need Euro 2008 to disappear. That tournament is no good for my productivity. It is good for my enjoyment of soccer, but that's not what this blog is about.
The Dutch fans are pretty cool though:
(someone should let them know orange isn't it their flag though)
Alright, so I'm actually completely guessing on the days behind. But, I'm catching up. I swear.
I took corporations in law school and the NY version doesn't seem to be terribly different. The lecturer ain't bad and is pretty enthusiastic without being annoying.
Did I mention how glad I am to be done with the NY Practice lectures yet?
So I'm gonna finally make it through P&P this morning. I can't stand this lecture. I think I'd rather listen to any other subject after 3 days of this.
If you know my actual name, please do not use it. I can't edit comments, so I have deleted any that used my name. I'm trying to keep this blog fairly anonymous.
Thanks. :)
Unfortunately, I am now approximately 6 days behind. Time to turn the studying up a notch.
