Anxiety over MEE UBE essay performance in NY, followed directions for once my third attempt and feel worse Forum

[gladiator0flaw11]

The first two sittings I failed, but have been getting closer and now this time after going through terrible break-up last year's sitting, I was motivated to do it right but I'm having regrets thinking about my word count. I studied only the outline material they told us was on the exam and during my prep essays, I'd get feedback saying I got to the right conclusion using the right law, but mislabeled the issue statement somehow.

More importantly, I loved going off on tangents starting with basic definition of a contract and all the other laws, even if they didn't apply because I thought if my Law statements were correct even if not applicable it had to mean points, WAS I WRONG!

My instructor told me I would go way too in-depth and it's also my way insecurity about my Issue statements I guess and the law I did apply I'm confident was correct, but structure was off with "Whether A can contest J's win via valid marriage from State A" or something like that you know.

So I stuck to the relevant facts only for the MPT and for the MEE my essays were disgustingly shorter, one was 1700 words and it's got me suffering from anxiety until results are out. As much as it may have helped to stuck to only the issues and relevant issue, I was just trying to maximize my chances at points. The MBE felt better than the last two times because of the shorter question stems and in my opinion it's easier to do 2,500 prep MBE questions and be ready. Thoughts if anyone else is having concern over essay performance? GL to everyone waiting, I'd be stunned if I passed and if not I'll prob sit for Florida's bar exam depending upon how close I was.

[happyhour1122]

The first two sittings I failed, but have been getting closer and now this time after going through terrible break-up last year's sitting, I was motivated to do it right but I'm having regrets thinking about my word count. I studied only the outline material they told us was on the exam and during my prep essays, I'd get feedback saying I got to the right conclusion using the right law, but mislabeled the issue statement somehow.

More importantly, I loved going off on tangents starting with basic definition of a contract and all the other laws, even if they didn't apply because I thought if my Law statements were correct even if not applicable it had to mean points, WAS I WRONG!

My instructor told me I would go way too in-depth and it's also my way insecurity about my Issue statements I guess and the law I did apply I'm confident was correct, but structure was off with "Whether A can contest J's win via valid marriage from State A" or something like that you know.

So I stuck to the relevant facts only for the MPT and for the MEE my essays were disgustingly shorter, one was 1700 words and it's got me suffering from anxiety until results are out. As much as it may have helped to stuck to only the issues and relevant issue, I was just trying to maximize my chances at points. The MBE felt better than the last two times because of the shorter question stems and in my opinion it's easier to do 2,500 prep MBE questions and be ready. Thoughts if anyone else is having concern over essay performance? GL to everyone waiting, I'd be stunned if I passed and if not I'll prob sit for Florida's bar exam depending upon how close I was.

First, I started off with basic definition of contracts in the contract question...For example in our Feb 2017 K question, I said "in order to have a valid K, there must be offer, acceptance and consideration...." blah blah blah...so i don't think you going off with basic contract definition is totally off... unless we both fucked it up

and second, "whehter A can contest J's win via valid marriage from state A"-> I am not understanding what your instructor's issue is with this. Wasn't this one of the questions?

Third, 1700 words don't seem short....

[ProspectiveStudent69]

The first two sittings I failed, but have been getting closer and now this time after going through terrible break-up last year's sitting, I was motivated to do it right but I'm having regrets thinking about my word count. I studied only the outline material they told us was on the exam and during my prep essays, I'd get feedback saying I got to the right conclusion using the right law, but mislabeled the issue statement somehow.

More importantly, I loved going off on tangents starting with basic definition of a contract and all the other laws, even if they didn't apply because I thought if my Law statements were correct even if not applicable it had to mean points, WAS I WRONG!

My instructor told me I would go way too in-depth and it's also my way insecurity about my Issue statements I guess and the law I did apply I'm confident was correct, but structure was off with "Whether A can contest J's win via valid marriage from State A" or something like that you know.

So I stuck to the relevant facts only for the MPT and for the MEE my essays were disgustingly shorter, one was 1700 words and it's got me suffering from anxiety until results are out. As much as it may have helped to stuck to only the issues and relevant issue, I was just trying to maximize my chances at points. The MBE felt better than the last two times because of the shorter question stems and in my opinion it's easier to do 2,500 prep MBE questions and be ready. Thoughts if anyone else is having concern over essay performance? GL to everyone waiting, I'd be stunned if I passed and if not I'll prob sit for Florida's bar exam depending upon how close I was.

It is good to show your knowledge of the law to the examiners. Basic statements of law should be included when they are relevant to the analysis or are necessary to your analysis. However, including irrelevant statements of law is a waste of precious time (no points). Being concise and straight to the point is more effective than simply listing inconsequential legal rules.

For instance, the Contracts question on the Feb '17 UBE could have been laid out as follows:

The cook cannot enforce the offer made by the grower. The issues are whether a valid offer, firm offer, or option contract was created.

Relevant Rules:

-Contracts require offer, acceptance, and consideration.
-Goods contracts are governed by the UCC. A good is a tangible item that is moveable at the time of identification to the contract. This contract is governed by the UCC because tomatoes are goods.
-Contacts for the sale of goods must include a quantity term, unless it is a requirements/output contract.
-In addition to regular offers, there are firm offers and options.
-Under the UCC, a firm offer is a promise to hold an offer open. Firm offers require: 1) a writing signed by the person to be bound; and 2) the person making the offer must be a merchant. Firm offers are only enforceable for 3 months, unless extended through proper means.
-Option contracts are also promises to hold open an offer and require consideration.

Analysis:

It is clear that an offer was made because the necessary elements were satisfied. The missing quantity term is inconsequential because it was a requirements/output contract. Thus, a valid offer has been made. However, under the facts of this case, it is necessary to determine if the offer was a firm offer or an option contract. Although a valid offer was made, the grower revoked this offer before the cook accepted.

Although the offer was revoked. The offer may still be alive if the record reflects that an option or firm offer was made.

The grower was not a merchant. He was unskilled and grew the tomatoes as a hobby. He had previously given tomatoes to others, but only as a kind gesture, not for a profit. Since the grower did not deal in goods of the kind (tomatoes), he is not a merchant. Labeling grower as a merchant is contrary to the case law/comments interpreting the "merchant" requirement. Consequently, without the existence of a merchant, there cannot be a firm offer. As such, there wasn't a firm offer.

In the alternative, it may be argued that an option contract was created. Here, no option was created because there was no consideration. Without consideration, there cannot be an option contract.

Although a valid offer was made, the cook failed to timely accept before the grower's revocation. Further, the offer was not an option or firm offer. Based on the foregoing facts, the cook will not prevail in a contract action against the grower.