Florida Bar Exam - Official Thread Forum

[robin600]

Welp adoption was like the one thing I didn't really nail in family law since it was hardly ever tested so fml.

[RC76]

Same. Essays sucked hard. Hopefully I just get enough points. Feel really good about the multiple-choice. I really would like to get about 75% or more of those in order to make up for my terrible terrible essays

Welp adoption was like the one thing I didn't really nail in family law since it was hardly ever tested so fml.

[VeritasCognitio]

There were two right answers for almost every question. No Evidence? Really?

In the same boat, I was often stuck between two answer choices as well! The actual multiple choice questions of the exam were magnitudes harder than Kaplan's or Barbri's. They tested so many nuanced exceptions.

those essay topics...

[not guilty]

We can't discuss fact patterns of multiple choice on here FYI. We can discuss law though.

The essays are fair game because they are immediately public.

[not guilty]

These are just things I mentioned at random..

Essay 1- Dependency: I got into adoption rules (employed, live in Fla, etc) parental rights rules, they are supposed to be given notice
of court proceedings. The baby daddy was interesting because he is supposed to do the father register thingy but they specifically mentioned to avoid that. Essentially they were appealing the circuit courts decision. I thought grandparents did not have much standing in regard to parental rights, but DCF is supposed to let them know about the sheltering and try to contact nearest relatives etc. Supremem Court said same sex couple is good for adoption.

Essay 2- Fla Con: Sunshine Law, Equal Protection, Rational Basis, Due process, Right to Assemble, Search & Seizure (phone taps lol), ethical conflict.

Essay 3- A9/A3: I went A9 (security agreement, attached, perfection) for most of it until that stopped check I went A3 (note vs draft). I'm sure I was wrong.

[AltheaBlue]

What in the hell was that? Commercial paper and no evidence? That was just mean today.

[Young Marino]

These are just things I mentioned at random..

Essay 1- Dependency: I got into adoption rules (employed, live in Fla, etc) parental rights rules, they are supposed to be given notice
of court proceedings. The baby daddy was interesting because he is supposed to do the father register thingy but they specifically mentioned to avoid that. Essentially they were appealing the circuit courts decision. I thought grandparents did not have much standing in regard to parental rights, but DCF is supposed to let them know about the sheltering and try to contact nearest relatives etc. Supremem Court said same sex couple is good for adoption.

Essay 2- Fla Con: Sunshine Law, Equal Protection, Rational Basis, Due process, Right to Assemble, Search & Seizure (phone taps lol), ethical conflict.

Essay 3- A9/A3: I went A9 (security agreement, attached, perfection) for most of it until that stopped check I went A3 (note vs draft). I'm sure I was wrong.

Same. I missed on the Due Process analaysis on Fl Con but said phone taps were right to privacy invasion idk my I felt my fl con was all over the place. Pretty much said the same for dependency and UCC

[not guilty]

MC Law:

Wills: Lapses vs Anti Lapse got me. I'm fairly certain none of those answers for "caveat" in wills were right. At least by bar prep definition.

Crim: Clearly they care more about capital crimes.

Civ: That was more than "basic procedure." Knowing a 20 day rule or something was fine but you needed to know a step deeper.

Business Entity: lol at the Florida bar to allow entry without having tested students skills in evidence. That's just plain dumb.

[not guilty]

I mean, was it mainly A9 or A3?

[DWS07224]

These are just things I mentioned at random..

Essay 1- Dependency: I got into adoption rules (employed, live in Fla, etc) parental rights rules, they are supposed to be given notice
of court proceedings. The baby daddy was interesting because he is supposed to do the father register thingy but they specifically mentioned to avoid that. Essentially they were appealing the circuit courts decision. I thought grandparents did not have much standing in regard to parental rights, but DCF is supposed to let them know about the sheltering and try to contact nearest relatives etc. Supremem Court said same sex couple is good for adoption.

Essay 2- Fla Con: Sunshine Law, Equal Protection, Rational Basis, Due process, Right to Assemble, Search & Seizure (phone taps lol), ethical conflict.

Essay 3- A9/A3: I went A9 (security agreement, attached, perfection) for most of it until that stopped check I went A3 (note vs draft). I'm sure I was wrong.

I had the same on Essay 2 plus wiretapping, vagueness/overbreadth, and special laws.

Totally messed up the A3. I had the same thoughts as you on Essay 1.

[RB78]

Of all the years to graduate law school and take the Florida Bar Exam for the first time, I gotta be the year with an entire dependency essay AND an entire Secured Transactions/Commercial Paper essay....If I was just one year ahead I could have had normal blue chip MBE subjects as my Florida essays......(no torts, contracts, criminal law, or real property = worst possible year to take this thing)

[Derek Vinyard]

Yeah, but what if the scores are really low? They would need to give a bigger curve to get more people up to an average of 136, right? I missed a couple things like Sunshine, as I didnt really think that was applicable and thought it would be better not to put it in there than to mess it up. I probably should have mentioned it. If I fail by a point that may very well be the reason why. I came up with the purchase money mortgage idea for the last one, which I also could have screwed up, but I put it in there anyway. A google search just revealed that a commercial purchase money mortgage is at least possible, so hopefully that will be worth something. lol.

[Young Marino]

Yeah, but what if the scores are really low? They would need to give a bigger curve to get more people up to an average of 136, right? I missed a couple things like Sunshine, as I didnt really think that was applicable and thought it would be better not to put it in there than to mess it up. I probably should have mentioned it. If I fail by a point that may very well be the reason why. I came up with the purchase money mortgage idea for the last one, which I also could have screwed up, but I put it in there anyway. A google search just revealed that a commercial purchase money mortgage is at least possible, so hopefully that will be worth something. lol.

I mean dude I am kicking myself for not getting the equal protection issue on con law. There is always gonna be points you leave on the table but I guess if you feel prepared you should be fine. Honestly all I did for UCC was make sure to put the rules in as best I could. I memorizied those things and then just bullshitted the application part. Hopefully that was enough. Also threw in a quick contracts analysis for Cosignor's claim against the chick with the museum. Idk how relevant that was but I was just throwing the kitchen sink at this thing at that point.

[RC76]

I really dont know if there is a curve or not. I mean, if there was a true curve, wouldnt the pass rates be somewhat similar from year to year. Here, somtimes its 70%, sometimes its 55%. I would love an explanation of the curve.

Yeah, but what if the scores are really low? They would need to give a bigger curve to get more people up to an average of 136, right? I missed a couple things like Sunshine, as I didnt really think that was applicable and thought it would be better not to put it in there than to mess it up. I probably should have mentioned it. If I fail by a point that may very well be the reason why. I came up with the purchase money mortgage idea for the last one, which I also could have screwed up, but I put it in there anyway. A google search just revealed that a commercial purchase money mortgage is at least possible, so hopefully that will be worth something. lol.

[not guilty]

If we all did great or we all did bad, they are still going to regulate the scale after the fact, just as Kaplan said. There is a reason we don't know how the scoring works. Do you think you did better than 40% of takers? That's what matters.


I think the mantra "throw out some law and make an analysis will pass the essays" is not accurate. You had people there fully prepared for a secured transaction and fla con law essay. You had people who probably work in dependency law. Citing a bunch of irrelevant law is not going to rack up points unless you can really tie it together. Graders are going to appreciate a solid bullshit argument, but not a random sentence that doesn't fit.

[DWS07224]

I mean, was it mainly A9 or A3?

A9 until the last two paragraphs. Damn dude how many times have you taken the bar? That's rough.

[DWS07224]

MC Law:

Wills: Lapses vs Anti Lapse got me. I'm fairly certain none of those answers for "caveat" in wills were right. At least by bar prep definition.

Crim: Clearly they care more about capital crimes.

Civ: That was more than "basic procedure." Knowing a 20 day rule or something was fine but you needed to know a step deeper.

Business Entity: lol at the Florida bar to allow entry without having tested students skills in evidence. That's just plain dumb.

Also, the caveat answer was creditors. Sorry man.

[not guilty]

I mean, was it mainly A9 or A3?

A9 until the last two paragraphs. Damn dude how many times have you taken the bar? That's rough.

Passed Georgia first try. Florida has been a major issue, but luckily I only need Part A now. In February my computer rejected exam soft and I hand wrote a disaster, but I passed MBE. I'm going to sit for MBE tom. just as a back up. Although I've only studied maybe 12 hours so I doubt I'll help myself. Very thankful Fla allows the scores to be averaged. Part A demands a lot of work to be ready for curve balls. I was really prepared, but not so much Article 9. Ugh.

*and what about me asking if it was A3/A9 (which I was luckily correct on) spurred you to ask me if I'm a retaker lol?

[not guilty]

Also, the caveat answer was creditors. Sorry man.

Don't be sorry, I got that right. They worded those very poorly.

[Teamesq]

The essays were horrible in my opinion. I passed the mbe in February and studied exclusively for Florida over the past 2 months. I STILL felt unprepared. It seems like the bar has shifted from its goal in testing minimum competence to deliberately trying to keep people out. There was absolutely nothing predictable about the Florida portion of the exam. They made it a point to test areas that were not highly testable. They knew full well that nobody would know adoption and barely anything about secured and commercial paper. They knew that historically people expected not to see biz org 2 times in a row. I'm not usually the type to complain. I can appreciate a fair exam, even if I was not prepared for it, but this one was just wrong on so many levels. I'm so pissed.

[hockeyman969]

These are just things I mentioned at random..

Essay 1- Dependency: I got into adoption rules (employed, live in Fla, etc) parental rights rules, they are supposed to be given notice
of court proceedings. The baby daddy was interesting because he is supposed to do the father register thingy but they specifically mentioned to avoid that. Essentially they were appealing the circuit courts decision. I thought grandparents did not have much standing in regard to parental rights, but DCF is supposed to let them know about the sheltering and try to contact nearest relatives etc. Supremem Court said same sex couple is good for adoption.

Essay 2- Fla Con: Sunshine Law, Equal Protection, Rational Basis, Due process, Right to Assemble, Search & Seizure (phone taps lol), ethical conflict.

Essay 3- A9/A3: I went A9 (security agreement, attached, perfection) for most of it until that stopped check I went A3 (note vs draft). I'm sure I was wrong.

I had the same on Essay 2 plus wiretapping, vagueness/overbreadth, and special laws.

Totally messed up the A3. I had the same thoughts as you on Essay 1.

Am I the only one who analyzed challenging the judgment under the rules of civil procedure since there was no service of process? As the examiners made it a point that they challenged 13 months after the entry of judgment of termination.

That Con Law question was odd ball because it was adjusting the legislative findings which left me puzzled, I also addressed them placing a more specific government interest as the court in a time/place/manner is going to look to the government's proferred reason when deciding if a law will be valid.

Then again the Professional Responsibility qiestion tested messed up nuances...the representation was also affected by whether they controlled their representation and sent a closing letter: former client they would be ok to rep if they had informed consent because the prior work involving the youth center was transactional but if Cathy were a current client (which lawyers can be unaware), they be screwed hardcore their hands would be tied because of duty to her. "Prior representation" not "former client"

That PR issue was really really really really and I mean really nuanced, like they wanted to pour salt and squeeze lemon into the wound.

When guys who were on Harvard Law Review felt themselves burnt like bad toast or worst then nasty microwave popcorn....all in good company.

[Pass302]

The essays were horrible in my opinion. I passed the mbe in February and studied exclusively for Florida over the past 2 months. I STILL felt unprepared. It seems like the bar has shifted from its goal in testing minimum competence to deliberately trying to keep people out. There was absolutely nothing predictable about the Florida portion of the exam. They made it a point to test areas that were not highly testable. They knew full well that nobody would know adoption and barely anything about secured and commercial paper. They knew that historically people expected not to see biz org 2 times in a row. I'm not usually the type to complain. I can appreciate a fair exam, even if I was not prepared for it, but this one was just wrong on so many levels. I'm so pissed.

I agree with you! That was just ridiculous. I can appreciate a family law/dependency essay, but not on a small (1/2 portion of my outline). At least the MC's are worth the same as the 3 essays, so just toss it up to the big man above and hope for the best.

[Teamesq]

That's what I plan to do. It's in God's hands at this point.

[hockeyman969]

I had a feeling we would get hosed on this stuff. Hardcore.

[Teamesq]

If the major commercial review courses did not emphasize the topics tested, then most of us are likely in the same boat with respect to the way we allocated our time studying. With that said, the curve will probably be very generous.