I was looking something up about the person the Rutter Group was named after (we use those practice guides a lot at the office) and it mentioned they also founded the Gilbert study guides.
I looked that up and came across a strange website that had a review of the Gilbert outlines. They also had other information.
While I don’t agree with everything the website says, and I haven’t looked at anything other than the two pages I’m going to discuss here, there’s some important things you might find helpful. On this page:
https://lawschoolsecretstosuccess.com/law-school-success/
Secrets #2; #3; and #4 are must reads. They’re things I’ve been telling you, but maybe if you read them there you’ll internalize them and take action. The other stuff on the page is somewhat true, but I don’t agree with all of it.
They also talk about the FYLSX here:
https://lawschoolsecretstosuccess.com/baby-bar-exam-fylse/
They’re saying 150 practice essays and 3,000 practice MBE. I did probably 80 practice essays and 1,800 practice MBE. That allowed me to earn a 639 scaled (79%) on my first attempt. I would say what I did is the low end and what they’re suggesting is the high end for the FYLSX. The overarching point is that the only way to succeed on the exam is to do a massive amount of practice over a sustained period of time. You cannot cram for this exam. There’s a skill set that must be developed in order to pass. You must memorize the law, and then practice exam taking.
That website is clearly trying to market their products. They ostensively review other products and then explain why theirs are supposedly better. I have no opinion on any of that, especially since I relied on several of the products they criticize.
At any rate, I hope that some of the information is useful. I found it interesting and thought it worth sharing.
Perfect Tender Rule Test Answers
Battle of the Forms (UCC 2-207)
Battle of the Forms (UCC 2-207)
Essays were Battle of the Forms is raised.
FYLSX
June 2020
Q2
A
June 2016
Q2
A
June 2014
Q4
A
B
June 2012
Q1
B
CBX
February 2016
Q6
B
Promissory Estoppel — Detrimental Reliance
Freedom of Contract and the Second Restatement
Offer Termination by Operation of Law
§ 48 Death or Incapacity of Offeror or OffereeAn offeree’s power of acceptance is terminated when the offeree or offeror dies or is deprived of legal capacity to enter into the proposed contract.
However, both barbi and CALI discuss how irrevocable offers (e.g. options) don’t terminate in this situation. I decided to look up the caselaw. It’s likely that most jurisdictions track to California on this issue.
“An option is an offer and if it is without consideration, it is revoked by the death of the offeror prior to acceptance. *452 If consideration is given, it is a contract binding upon the offeror and upon his successors in interest after his death. See case cited in 6 Cal.Jur., pp. 48–53, §§ 27, 28, 29; Williston, Contracts (Revised Ed.), §§ 61, 62; Cal.Civ.Code, § 1587(4).” (Bard v. Kent (1942) 19 Cal.2d 449, 451–452 [122 P.2d 8, 10])
So an irrevocable offer does not terminate by operation of law in the case of death or incapacity. A successor in interest can be the decedent’s estate, etc.
Merchants
Essays were Merchants are raised.
2018 June
Q1
A
B
2017 June
Q1
A
B
2017 October
Q3
A
B
2016 June
Q2
A
B
2016 October
http://www.calbar.ca.gov/Portals/0/documents/admissions/fyx/FYLSX_Oct2016_SelectedAnswers_R.pdf
Q2
A
2015 October
Q4
A discusses under other issues
B
2014 June
Q4
A
B
2013 June
Q3
B
2013 October
Q1
A
B
2012 June
Q1
A discussed in GL
B interspersed with other issues
Emerson Stafford analyses of Feb 1996 Q1 breach question
Essay text archived here: February 1996 Q1
Some quick notes on procedural history
One of the things we to when briefing cases is the procedural history of the case. While every state has its own court hierarchy, most follow a structure similar to the federal government (i.e. trial -> appellate -> supreme). On the other hand, some are quite different.
While you’ll be exposed to federal cases and cases from every state, a majority of cases you’ll encounter will be from California and New York. Given the populations of those two states, it makes sense that there’s a great deal of litigation coming from them.
California courts follow a structure very similar to that of the federal government.
New York (NY) Courts have a very different structure.
You can follow the link below to see how NY criminal courts are structured. It’s not relevant here because we’re concerned with contract law. At any rate, this should help if you’re confused by the NY court structure.
References
https://www.uscourts.gov/about-federal-courts/court-role-and-structure
https://www.courts.ca.gov/2113.htm
http://www.nycourts.gov/courts/structure.shtml
Tips for briefing
One of my students found this and said they found it extremely helpful. The case it uses as an example, Lucy v. Zehmer, a foundational case for formation, and one of the things we cover in week 2.