Florida Bar Exam - Official Thread Forum

[mystikal]

How is everyone? Doesn’t seem like there are too many of us on here taking the exam in Feb. am I the only one who is starting to hyperventilate?

Im a 6 time taker... Im freaking out... I missed the last 3 exams by 1 point (Both FL and MBE) im a 135 guy.... The stress is piling on

Ugh that stinks.
How are your essays? Or was it the Multiple choice that was messing with your score?

Im taking the Florida portion since I passed MBE last time. Hoping for some plain straight forward essay's this go around. Going to pass this TIME!

[yennem]

How is everyone? Doesn’t seem like there are too many of us on here taking the exam in Feb. am I the only one who is starting to hyperventilate?

Im a 6 time taker... Im freaking out... I missed the last 3 exams by 1 point (Both FL and MBE) im a 135 guy.... The stress is piling on

Ugh that stinks.
How are your essays? Or was it the Multiple choice that was messing with your score?

Im taking the Florida portion since I passed MBE last time. Hoping for some plain straight forward essay's this go around. Going to pass this TIME!

MC is what gets me, my essays were above average... Im using Themis this time around and I still dont feel comfortable with FL MC...

[johngotti]

Do the proctors have tissues? I don't think we're allowed to bring them.

[yennem]

Mbe second half was brutal

[not guilty]

Got you guys with a Trust essay and wills multiple choice?

[court_bacon]

Anyone else have battle wounds from those tables?

[florida2015]

Mbe second half was brutal

I thought I was the only one who felt that good 'ol MBE punch in the second half

[yennem]

Mbe second half was brutal

I thought I was the only one who felt that good 'ol MBE punch in the second half

I felt good until that happened... now I'm doubting myself

[PBateman1]

Mbe second half was brutal

I thought I was the only one who felt that good 'ol MBE punch in the second half

I thought the morning set was harder. I mean, both were difficult but I thought there were more softballs where I instantly knew the answer in the afternoon and there were almost none for me in the am.

[La_La_Legal]

Anyone else have battle wounds from those tables?

I have a collection of wood chips under my skin.

[refugeelawyer26]

What the heck was the second essay asking with a couple of those questions. Noooo idea.

[Azwildcat]

Torts? I thought the essays were fairly straightforward. I wish I studied trusts more. UCC 9 question wasn’t bad. They didn’t even ask any questions about priority. Just attachment, perfection, and self-help. MC I had a hard time with. If I fail it’ll be because of the multiple choice. The MBE was the typical nonsense. I’ve taken the MBE in another state twice before and never felt good about it. Always felt like I guessed on most of them.

[refugeelawyer26]

Torts? I thought the essays were fairly straightforward. I wish I studied trusts more. UCC 9 question wasn’t bad. They didn’t even ask any questions about priority. Just attachment, perfection, and self-help. MC I had a hard time with. If I fail it’ll be because of the multiple choice. The MBE was the typical nonsense. I’ve taken the MBE in another state twice before and never felt good about it. Always felt like I guessed on most of them.

Yes UCc 9 question was straightforward with those questions but not the 3rd and 4th questions.

[bhagner]

I am a Wisconsin lawyer who just took the Florida exam (Feb. 2019). Going into it, I was mostly worried about the essays. I specifically did not want a Commercial Paper or Secured Transactions question. However, I felt that the three essay questions, including the Secured Transactions question, were relatively straightforward. But that also makes me nervous that I missed something. The Florida multiple choice were harder than I expected, especially with all of the partnership and corporations questions. I was fairly confident going into the MBE, but the morning part seemed really tough to me, and the afternoon seemed a little easier. I have always been a good test taker, but this one has me nervous.

[Azwildcat]

I agree. The business associations and wills were my problem. I would prefer an essay on these topics. It’s strange that Florida tests them as multiple choice. In Texas, state subjects are essays. A&P and corporations are subjects that easily mess you up on a multiple choice question. I studied the Barbri lecture handouts thoroughly on these topics and even typed them up to make sure I knew the rules. I don’t think it helped. I had the Barbri Florida practice MC/Essay book that had practice MC. Those got incredibly hard for partnerships and corporations. But I ran out of time and only did about 300 practice questions altogether out of that book.

[Jmart082]

Florida MC was absolutely brutal, and I pray that I even got half of those questions correct. The UCC Article 9 and Trusts essay questions had some minute details where I wasn't completely sure about the law, and the Torts essay was a clear play by the examiners to trap you into talking about Joint and several liability, where there is no such thing in FLA. As for the MBE, it was about as brutal as it usually is, although the second half in particular made me want to cry. Might be back in July, but with an exam that is as intentionally as misleading as that one, it's hard to say how or why you did as well or as poorly as you might have until you see the results on paper.

[Granite]

The trusts essay was straightforward; the challenge was that there were a ton of issues so it was a gut check as to whether you could spot all of them and explain the rules. The torts essay was so simple that the challenge seemed to be that you had to know the rule for one specific area of the subject or else you were screwed, and then there was a lot of room to argue both sides and pick up points in the analysis.

The UCC essay left me confused and full of regret. It was clearly testing secured transactions, but there didn't seem to be anything on priority, which is the point of secured transactions in the first place. So once you got through attachment and the rules for repossession/sale, there wasn't much more to say. Also I've had nightmares that there was some commercial paper stuff on there that I just entirely neglected to mention. Again the main thrust of commercial paper seemed to be irrelevant for this fact pattern––i.e. there wasn't anything on holders in due course, transfer or presentment warranties, or forgery/alteration--but they did mention a couple of terms ("promissory note" and "incorporation by reference") which at least nominally raise article 3 issues. Did anyone find commercial paper issues?

[Jmart082]

The trusts essay was straightforward; the challenge was that there were a ton of issues so it was a gut check as to whether you could spot all of them and explain the rules. The torts essay was so simple that the challenge seemed to be that you had to know the rule for one specific area of the subject or else you were screwed, and then there was a lot of room to argue both sides and pick up points in the analysis.

The UCC essay left me confused and full of regret. It was clearly testing secured transactions, but there didn't seem to be anything on priority, which is the point of secured transactions in the first place. So once you got through attachment and the rules for repossession/sale, there wasn't much more to say. Also I've had nightmares that there was some commercial paper stuff on there that I just entirely neglected to mention. Again the main thrust of commercial paper seemed to be irrelevant for this fact pattern––i.e. there wasn't anything on holders in due course, transfer or presentment warranties, or forgery/alteration--but they did mention a couple of terms ("promissory note" and "incorporation by reference") which at least nominally raise article 3 issues. Did anyone find commercial paper issues?

I can't remember if the subject matter of the security agreement/financing statement was a promissory note, but I'm inclined to say that it wasn't, in which case, there was no commercial paper issue. I also don't remember discussing it in any event.

[Granite]

I can't remember if the subject matter of the security agreement/financing statement was a promissory note, but I'm inclined to say that it wasn't, in which case, there was no commercial paper issue. I also don't remember discussing it in any event.

The prompt provided the actual text of the security agreement, which included both the terms "promissory note" and "incorporation by reference." These are commercial paper terms we had to learn for the bar exam, but maybe they're also just stock contract language in real-life secured transactions, which would make them distractors for this particular question given that nothing else in commercial paper was implicated. The most that could have been said re. commercial paper was that the maker is liable under contract to the payee. I completely forgot to mention that, but if that's all the commercial paper there was then I can't imagine it will be damning.

[11523]

I was trying to think of the different topics the essays covered. Here are the high points that I hit and could remember. Did I miss anything that you can think of?

Trust
Elements of Formation and Trust type
Trustee Duties and breach
Spendthrift Trust
Revocation of inter vivid trust
Termination

Secured Transactions
Attachment elements
Perfection elements
Accession
Foreclosure
PR

Negligence
Elements
Premise liability
Defense: Pure Comparative Negligence
Defense: Fabre
Damages - No J&S liability
PR

[Jmart082]

I can't remember if the subject matter of the security agreement/financing statement was a promissory note, but I'm inclined to say that it wasn't, in which case, there was no commercial paper issue. I also don't remember discussing it in any event.

The prompt provided the actual text of the security agreement, which included both the terms "promissory note" and "incorporation by reference." These are commercial paper terms we had to learn for the bar exam, but maybe they're also just stock contract language in real-life secured transactions, which would make them distractors for this particular question given that nothing else in commercial paper was implicated. The most that could have been said re. commercial paper was that the maker is liable under contract to the payee. I completely forgot to mention that, but if that's all the commercial paper there was then I can't imagine it will be damning.

I
Now that I think about it, you are right, and I do remember briefly considering whether to outline the issue, but opted not to instead, because it didn't seem like major issue or an opportunity for serious points, given the time constraint. In retrospect, my discussion of the issues in the trusts question, particularly, the fact that it converts from revocable to irrevocable upon death of the settlor and my cursory examination of the alimony issue in that question worry me a whole lot more than the secured transactions question that we were given.

[Jmart082]

I was trying to think of the different topics the essays covered. Here are the high points that I hit and could remember. Did I miss anything that you can think of?

Trust
Elements of Formation and Trust type
Trustee Duties and breach
Spendthrift Trust
Revocation of inter vivid trust
Termination

Secured Transactions
Attachment elements
Perfection elements
Accession
Foreclosure
PR

Negligence
Elements
Premise liability
Defense: Pure Comparative Negligence
Defense: Fabre
Damages - No J&S liability
PR

These are great. Pretty much covers the big ones that I can remember.

[Granite]

I was trying to think of the different topics the essays covered. Here are the high points that I hit and could remember. Did I miss anything that you can think of?

Trust
Elements of Formation and Trust type
Trustee Duties and breach
Spendthrift Trust
Revocation of inter vivid trust
Termination

Secured Transactions
Attachment elements
Perfection elements
Accession
Foreclosure
PR

Negligence
Elements
Premise liability
Defense: Pure Comparative Negligence
Defense: Fabre
Damages - No J&S liability
PR

For trusts, I also had discretionary support clauses/powers granted by settlor to trustee (i.e. trustee has sole discretion to distribute for beneficiary's HEMS).

[flbartaker]

Yep. You have all the issues I spotted and wrote about. Except that I also raised a bit of Florida Con Law (Police Powers) in the Secured Transactions essay to discuss the Health Commission's ability to take away her food truck license.

[amr2018]

I basically spotted the same issues as discussed here, but I also added some notes about certificate of title/rules for perfection of a motor vehicle as the collateral here was a food truck. Thought it may have been worth mentioning, but did not know the PRECISE wording of those rules so who knows if it helped or not.